520,000 in SAF
-
Numbers of soldiers mean nothing, it is the number of equipment plus type of equipment that is need to be closely guarded!!!
both personnel and inventory have some bearings to the strength of an army. both should be accorded the same treatment with regards to confidentiality.
And most nations do not closely guard the number of personnel and officially announce them from time to time especially in defence budget.
BTW 320K does not means a lot in SEA, do you know that???
on the same note, some armies officially inflated or deflated their actual strength for a spectrum of reasons.
320K is about the average in SEA and given SG's defence requirement, none should question the SAF's ability to fully equip its soldiers.
Or is it 480K? -
Originally posted by ferryman2393:both personnel and inventory have some bearings to the strength of an army. both should be accorded the same treatment with regards to confidentiality.
on the same note, some armies officially inflated or deflated their actual strength for a spectrum of reasons.
320K is about the average in SEA and given SG's defence requirement, none should question the SAF's ability to fully equip its soldiers.
Or is it 480K?
No one claim is 480k , is a typo!!!
I posted a evolution of SAF especially the abt half of NS men in PDF , go read it. -
No one claim is 480k , is a typo!!!
480K+40K = 520K.
I've humbly read the whole humorous posts here including your history lesson.
In all reality, the numbers could be more. In some armies, soldiers are required to answer their call of duty for five years after they ended their service.
try figuring that out for the rest of SEA. -
maybe what i'm trying to say is that the 480K was actually the truth before somebody decided to typo it down to 280K.
i'm being paranoid here.
or am i not? -
Dun need to !!!!Originally posted by ferryman2393:480K+40K = 520K.
I've humbly read the whole humorous posts here including your history lesson.
In all reality, the numbers could be more. In some armies, soldiers are required to answer their call of duty for five years after they ended their service.
try figuring that out for the rest of SEA.
Most SEA armies already have trouble in fully equipped all their active personnel to fight in a conventional warfare, most are like COIN units i.e.very very light infantry, let alone equipping all their reserve, do you know that???? -
Your guess or speculation is as good as mine, but I dun see a need to lie , becos one could easily estimate it very well based on population growth, dempographic etc to guess how many fighting men is available for SAF.Originally posted by ferryman2393:maybe what i'm trying to say is that the 480K was actually the truth before somebody decided to typo it down to 280K.
i'm being paranoid here.
or am i not? -
I see..Originally posted by gary1910:I was explaining evolution of our NS men especially the 2nd line PDF, which means all NS men have an impt role to play, all are fully trained and equipped, not as cannon folder as some assume!!! 
2PDF will be very upset with you, as they have been out harping the fact that they are not 2nd line but are focused on homeland defense, versus.. -
Simple estimate of our demographics, with factoring in the years that each soldier/reservist has to serve, and you would see that even 400k is a very conservative estimate.
You are talking of able-bodied male citizens from 18-55. -
Well , I try not emphasize the offensive nature of our.......so called frontline Div.Originally posted by insouciant:I see.. 2PDF will be very upset with you, as they have been out harping the fact that they are not 2nd line but are focused on homeland defense, versus..
So frontline and 2nd line loh!!!! -
Well , there are many who have downgraded, went oversea to work etcOriginally posted by LazerLordz:Simple estimate of our demographics, with factoring in the years that each soldier/reservist has to serve, and you would see that even 400k is a very conservative estimate.
You are talking of able-bodied male citizens from 18-55.
And those in SCDF and police also have a large group of NS men.
Anyway NS men liable for svc up to certain age due to rank and vocation, not all are up 55y/o. -
2 PDF troops are not 2nd line troops. If what is said about the S'pore doomsday thingy is true, we need some one to protect the home base while the rest are "out there somewhere"...
After all, if the home base falls, ... -
so our 2PDF is actually like the US's National Guard right?
-
Not really. The National Guard can and is activated to for overseas missions as well, they don't just look after CONUS.
The 2PDF is specialised for homeland defense. Even with a active battalion within.
It just occurred to me, so one of the other divisions is less one active battalion then. -
eh.. if u guys realise.. 320k is the second largest size in SEA liao.. And even countries like China and USA which are like 100 times our size only got military of a few million in size leh.. So how can say 320 k small???
-
Well , I will say at best 3rd place, remember the 320K is for all 3 svc.Originally posted by alec85:eh.. if u guys realise.. 320k is the second largest size in SEA liao.. And even countries like China and USA which are like 100 times our size only got military of a few million in size leh.. So how can say 320 k small???
Vietnam got abt 489K of regulars , if add in militia + reserve should be more than I mil.( but there is plan for further reduction)
Indonesia got abt 331K , if add in reserve is abt double of it.
Thailand regulars is abt 312K.
All the above have very large regular force, so I will say SG around 3rd~4th place.
But all the above is not very well equipped, the best equipped I wll say is Thailand , not all equipmennt are the most modern but at least not obsolete.
Next will be Vietnam, they are suppose to have largest inventory of weapons in SEA, some new but mostly old & obsloete,so the problem is , how many are operational???
Indonesia is now pretty weak but might changed in the future.
The army is large but only some are considered as well trained, KOSTRAD has abt 2 Div that are trained for conventional warfare and KOPASSUS are the SF units, abt Div size.
The rest are under Kodam , territorial units , not very well trained and equipped . -
so what if we have so many soldiers? the SAF and the singaporeans in general are relatively untested in a REAL war.
That`s too far-fetched a generalization. Im pleasantly surprised it continues to crop up every now and then. As a matter of fact, not too many professional soldiers have seen real combat. That includes a whole gamut of countries such as France, Germany, Japan, etc. Unless, you`re the US, you don`t send a large proportion of your troops to fight. A few hundred or thousands(extremely rare) do not account for an entire armed forces. Also, combat intensities and circumstances differs. And it`s completely pointless to say your country had the experienced of being in a previous war long ago. The soldiers who took part in it are dead or out of commission. The lessons learnt will generally be the same lessons distilled and learnt by many armed forces all around the world.
I agree that many countries in SEA would have difficulty in matching our rapid deployment capability.
Someone mentioned about corruption somewhere. I would like to make the point that it is inherently dangerous to have an armed forces plagued by corruption and go to war. It impedes progress in times of peace. It will impede goals in times of war. That`s self-defeating especially if an enemy knows where and how to exploit; perhaps even before the first shot is fired. -
our
hard ware may not be the latest,but most likely the most
well kept ,most ready to war
Take V-150/-200 Armoured Personnel Carrier 450 /450 quantity/in service
for example.This decades old platform has gone through
major overhaul and now a brand new platorm.
i forgot where i posted the info.of this V-150/200.
if u find ,pl post here. -
I remember a number being quoted 10 years ago - in Defending the Lion City, if I'm not wrong - at 350,000 including reservists for SAF. Of course, how Tim Huxley obtained this figure is anybody's guess.
So with our dwindling birth rate, it is not surprising that 10 years later, our strength is down to 280, 000.
Another alarming figure oft quoted is that only 40% of any standing modern army are actual frontline combat troops. The other 60% is logistics and other non-combat personnel.
So if we go by 40% of 280,000, this = 112,000 frontline combat troops.
Let's say within this 112,000 combat troops 50% are infantrymen. Then this means we have 56,000 infantrymen in SAF.
(The other 50% of combat troops are combat personnel in Armoured, Arty, Navy, Airforce, SADA etc)
If there are 400 people in an infantry battalion, then it means we have around 140 infantry battalions (or 46 brigades, or 15 divisions).
And within these 140 battalions, about half will be older units comprised of men over 30 and understrength due to attrition of age etc.
So we'll have around 70 useful battalions, and 70 "Dad's Army" 2nd line battalions.
Maths is fun!!!
I'm sure these calculations are hoplessly inaccurate, just for a laugh... -
Wrong!!!
Last time quoted was 350K active + NS men
Now is 40K active + 280K NS men = 320K
Next is:
Inf Bn ~600 men
Armoured Bn ~730 men
Another I have problem is this:Another alarming figure oft quoted is that only 40% of any standing modern army are actual frontline combat troops. The other 60% is logistics and other non-combat personnel.
This may not apply to SAF, a lot of base maintenece, food, spare mgt etc has been outsource to ST Engg.
Anyway , a lot of changes with the 3G revolution, SAF is I believe or at least going to be quite different from now.
Tim Huxley's book will be very outdated by then. -
I remember also TIm Huxley's say 350k. He was referring to whole SAF strength of active + reservists. Is this what you mean?Originally posted by gary1910:Last time quoted was 350K active + NS men
Now is 40K active + 280K NS men = 320K
Daniel's figure is too low but how did you get 600? Perhaps you include ALL the personnel in a bn including the service/support like cooks, storemen, drivers etc....Originally posted by gary1910:Next is:
Inf Bn ~600 men
I think Daniel when he said 40% frontline and 60% support - he was counting only the actual "combat" elements of each unit.
The cooks, drivers, storemen and other support/admin staff within the battalion are all included with other service and support elements outside of the infantry battalions as the non-combat 60%.
This revelation first came out during the Vietnam War when the non-combat troops outnumbered the combat troops.
Here is my calculation - also just for fun so dun take seriously...
ThereÂ’s 7 in a section, about 30 in a platoon. 3 platoons in a company = 90. Add another 20 misc admin and officers, stll only 110 in a rifle company. One battalion has 3 rifle companies + 1 support company = about 450. (Given that many reservist units are understrength, this figure should be about right.) -
Will 3G mean more combat troops or less? Isn't there more people needed to operate the gadgets? At best, the added technology just helps us maintain the numbers as the population dwindles as birth rates plunge ever lower.Originally posted by gary1910:Anyway, a lot of changes with the 3G revolution, SAF is I believe or at least going to be quite different from now.
And when you look at today's ever softening, pampered city-bred computer generation, it is food-for-thought what kind of combat troopers of the future they will make. And how will they stand up against tough professional jungle fighters of foreign armies.
You can look at 3G as a big "hooray-we-are-the-most-modern-this-that" but in reality it is a desperate measure to keep SAF a viable fighting force as the numbers drop and the quality of soldiers become weaker and weaker. If you remember some editorials from ST a decade ago, this problem was discussed at length. And the falling numbers is what led SAF to seek "modernisation". -
Some unit have 3 sections and some 4 sections, not sure abt any changes.Originally posted by moca:Daniel's figure is too low but how did you get 600? Perhaps you include ALL the personnel in a bn including the service/support like cooks, storemen, drivers etc....
I think Daniel when he said 40% frontline and 60% support - he was counting only the actual "combat" elements of each unit.
The cooks, drivers, storemen and other support/admin staff within the battalion are all included with other service and support elements outside of the infantry battalions as the non-combat 60%.
This revelation first came out during the Vietnam War when the non-combat troops outnumbered the combat troops.
Here is my calculation - also just for fun so dun take seriously...
ThereÂ’s 7 in a section, about 30 in a platoon. 3 platoons in a company = 90. Add another 20 misc admin and officers, stll only 110 in a rifle company. One battalion has 3 rifle companies + 1 support company = about 450. (Given that many reservist units are understrength, this figure should be about right.)
I think we leave it as that, not to reveal too much info.
Those that are support roles in a combat unit are as impt as those combat roles becos they are lifeline for them, provide supply , intel that keep them alive, and they will be at the front as well , supporting them. -
Not really, becos they are better educated thus much more easier to train, especially high tech computerised stuff like BMS etc.Originally posted by moca:Will 3G mean more combat troops or less? Isn't there more people needed to operate the gadgets? At best, the added technology just helps us maintain the numbers as the population dwindles as birth rates plunge ever lower.
And when you look at today's ever softening, pampered city-bred computer generation, it is food-for-thought what kind of combat troopers of the future they will make. And how will they stand up against tough professional jungle fighters of foreign armies.
You can look at 3G as a big "hooray-we-are-the-most-modern-this-that" but in reality it is a desperate measure to keep SAF a viable fighting force as the numbers drop and the quality of soldiers become weaker and weaker. If you remember some editorials from ST a decade ago, this problem was discussed at length. And the falling numbers is what led SAF to seek "modernisation".
Secondly, even our neighbour has the budget to implement NCW, they still have problem with the software parts, becos most of their soldiers are lowly educated, not many educated will join the army.
Something like our Hokkien pengs in the early days, chiong sua ok, operate equipment, blur like sotong!!!
As for our yound men today, I think they are better than the old days, reasons???
Good food, our young men average height has grown quite a lot, & they are more into sports than those in the early days, so physically better.
Anyway, in the old days & even now, no recruit could be well prepare for army life, both mentally as well as physically becos they have never gone thru tough training before!!!
But becos they r physically fitter now, they r better equipped to overcome the tough training as compare NSF in the old days.
As for the reason for 3G army is not becos of what you have stated.
It is becos almost all modern armies is going thru the same process , is the next evolution of modern warfare, if SAF dun do so , it will be left behind by others.
Based on GW1 and GW2, US army have suffered incredible low losses, tat is not due to just planes and Apaches etc but NCW warfare aspect of the US army that could "see" better, react faster than the enemy that make the difference.
Go read abt NCW and why most armies going thru this direction. -
Will 3G mean more combat troops or less? Isn't there more people needed to operate the gadgets? At best, the added technology just helps us maintain the numbers as the population dwindles as birth rates plunge ever lower.
It fluctuates. The reason why National Service was cut recently to 2 years is because we have had too many babies not too long ago. Singapore is in no danger of vanishing from the face of the earth.And when you look at today's ever softening, pampered city-bred computer generation, it is food-for-thought what kind of combat troopers of the future they will make. And how will they stand up against tough professional jungle fighters of foreign armies.
When you look at the ever ridiculous antics as per military matters/issues played by neighbours(some), it makes sense to have a well educated population rather than one who can`t seem to decide what to buy and how to use what you buy. On a serious note, training is the key. Another is money. A lot of soldiers fighting in the streets of Lebanon and Iraq are city-bred. The hind-sight is that if you stay in a `kampong', it`s unlikely you`ll know that.
Part of the idea of maintaining military superiority is to indulge in the latest technologies and strategies. The Greeks had the phalanx, the British had thier neat navy ships, the Americans had the peerless carrier battle groups, etc. You can also say these are force multipliers which enable you to do things your enemy can`t with the same number of troops. Of course, if you`re staying in a country which can`t afford all these, you really need to find some reasons to make sense of the gap in capability. Otherwise, `malu' you know.
You can look at 3G as a big "hooray-we-are-the-most-modern-this-that" but in reality it is a desperate measure to keep SAF a viable fighting force as the numbers drop and the quality of soldiers become weaker and weaker. If you remember some editorials from ST a decade ago, this problem was discussed at length. And the falling numbers is what led SAF to seek "modernisation". -
Actually I always wondered...
We outsource a lot of our combat support to ST companies, food, supplies, etc.. And ST is one of the biggest employers of Singapore...
So if there is a general call-up of troops, how would ST be able to continue supporting the military with 50%(?) of its employees called up?