SM1 IMPROVED
-
E SK 105 is in service with Argentina, Austria, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Morocco & Tuniaia so Moca u might be right
-
Which fighting army with combat experience uses light tanks ?
Light tanks are only good on paper. When the shooting starts and with so many LAWS, RPGs & ATGWs available to even the most impoverished army,
light tanks are sitting ducks on teh forward edge of battle. -
But not to forget the type of terrain we are fighting in.
even up on the hill, the visual range is only few hundreds of meters.
You can't see you can't shot....
-
Light tank is for recon. It has less armour n firepower than mbt but it has greater speed n mobility. Being smaller n lighter, it can get into places that larger tanks cannot,is less easy to detect n is much faster. It's role is to detect the enemy.It wants to avoid a fight if possible.It's lighter armaments allow it to fire a few rounds so as to disengage quickly,should the enemy see it n start shooting.
In our case, maybe include some fire support,take out some light vehicles,MG nests but not fight MBTs....We leave that to ATGM, no longer tank vs tank cos ATGM can now kill MBTs n easier n cheaper too. About $5000 vs $1500000+.... Our ATGM have greater chance of killing the MBT than SM1.....But we should include "flame weapons" (aircraft n artillery n mortar) n cluster n smart ammos for artillery n mortar to improve our odds....Can use "flame weapons" to attack armour as well -
Originally posted by ^Delta^:We already have 80-100 Centurion MBTs which have 105mm L7 main guns...
Add this to the unspecified number of tanks of unspecified origin with a mean gun to boot...
And the new light tanks in the pipeline with a planned 120mm main gun...
What our neighbours have to say is secondary... Its our right to buy what we deem fit.
Look at our Apaches and Formidable class stealth frigates for starters. I suppose tanks would pale in comparison to them in terms of shock value. 
Bro, the new light tanks are not exactly light, after all, we ain't going for the Buford AGS.
But the grapevine spells out a smooth-bore main gun though.. -
M60 Sabra Mk2. This is the IDF's upgraded M60 MBT
Sabra now available as MK3.
" The upgrade program is designed to upgrade 170 Turkish M60A1 (A3?) MBT. The Israeli Military Industries (IMI) is upgrading the M60A1 with a new 120-mm smoothbore gun, Elbit Systems electric gun and turret drive stabilization system with a new fire control system, and a new IMI armor package.
The prototype was delivered to Turkey in late 2005 and is now undergoing tests. Several other prototypes are being tested in Israel as part of a USD 700 million contract. Israeli armour officers described the upgraded Turkish M60A1 configuration, also known as the Sabra Mk III, as "a totally new tank", with one IDF armour specialist claiming that "in some areas it even supersedes the [Israeli] Merkava Mk IV"."
Sabra Mk3. -
Jus wondering, if the main gun is rifled or smooth bore, does it make a difference? As our smallarms usually have rifled barrels to improve accuracy, so why would anybody want a smoothbore one, which is like a musket? Pardon my ignorance...
-
E US also got use light tanks but replaces them only becos they cant ferry troops tat why they replace them with M3
-
Because they are not suppose to exist... Our govt have been denying it for so many years. Furthermore Light tanks are more "Defensive" in nature. The centurion u mention i believe belongs to Medium tank, which are considered more offensive in nature.Originally posted by ^Delta^:We already have 80-100 Centurion MBTs which have 105mm L7 main guns...
Add this to the unspecified number of tanks of unspecified origin with a mean gun to boot...
And the new light tanks in the pipeline with a planned 120mm main gun...
What our neighbours have to say is secondary... Its our right to buy what we deem fit.
Look at our Apaches and Formidable class stealth frigates for starters. I suppose tanks would pale in comparison to them in terms of shock value. -
I believe it's because rifled barrels cant fire rounds with fins or rockets for that matter.Originally posted by SpecOps87:Jus wondering, if the main gun is rifled or smooth bore, does it make a difference? As our smallarms usually have rifled barrels to improve accuracy, so why would anybody want a smoothbore one, which is like a musket? Pardon my ignorance... -
UpArmoured Centurion ERA type
UpArmoured Centurion ERA type -
UpGunned Centurion AEV
-
-02.jpg)
ONE OF OUR OPFOR ARMOUR (still used in large numbers) -
Rifled barrels impart a spin to the projectile. This spin really mess up the molten jet for HEAT rounds.Originally posted by SpecOps87:Jus wondering, if the main gun is rifled or smooth bore, does it make a difference? As our smallarms usually have rifled barrels to improve accuracy, so why would anybody want a smoothbore one, which is like a musket? Pardon my ignorance...
For rifled barrels to shoot HEAT rounds, you need to tail section spin. This identical to 84mm Carl Gustav rounds.
What about APFSDS rounds? The fins starts the spin action.
IIRC, NATO tank rounds are for all smooth bore. Only the British tanks used rifled rounds mainly to keep using their HESH rounds. This won't continue for long as HESH effectiveness as an anti tank round is very doubtful. -
Thanks for the enlightmentOriginally posted by touchstone_2000:Rifled barrels impart a spin to the projectile. This spin really mess up the molten jet for HEAT rounds.
For rifled barrels to shoot HEAT rounds, you need to tail section spin. This identical to 84mm Carl Gustav rounds.
What about APFSDS rounds? The fins starts the spin action.
IIRC, NATO tank rounds are for all smooth bore. Only the British tanks used rifled rounds mainly to keep using their HESH rounds. This won't continue for long as HESH effectiveness as an anti tank round is very doubtful.
Anyway, can anybody share what the following represent and mean. HEAT,SABOT,HESH,STAFF,APFSDS,SLAP or any other types of tank rounds avb.?
I know HEAT stands for High Explosive Anti-Tank,HESH stands for High Explosive Squash Head right? But what are their uses respectively?
Thanks, and once again, pardon my youthful ignorance. -
The govt neither admits nor denies. Plus the fact that Jane's already states we have it. Anyway, now that our neighbour has MBTs as well, it not really much of a big deal. If they can claim our MBTs are offensive, so can we for their MBTs. But they claim their MBTs are for defence, so we can too.Originally posted by Chaofan:Because they are not suppose to exist... Our govt have been denying it for so many years. Furthermore Light tanks are more "Defensive" in nature. The centurion u mention i believe belongs to Medium tank, which are considered more offensive in nature.
I believe we got our first F16s in the 80s but we denied it. But despite the denials I think the ppl up north already knew. Put it this way lah, it takes more than MBTs to win a war, so even if we did have MBTs, its not something to hoo & ha about. Its not as if we have cruise missiles, aircraft carriers or B2 stealth bombers.
Besides, its each country's right to buy whatever they see fit. When the M'sians announced plans to buy subs, MBTs, Sukhois, attack choppers, etc did we make noise? On the other hand, each time we buy a toy, the M'sians will start questioning the need for it. If M'sia doesn't need to ask S'pore for permission before they go shopping & they can buy anything they want, I don't see why we need to ask them for permission or worry about what they think. After all, like I said, its not as if we are buying nukes or the like.
As for MBTs being "offensive". Well I see M'sia's MLRS as a whole lot more offensive considering the large scale damage it can do & how inaccurate (compared to arty howitzers) they are. -
SABOT = A lightweight carrier in which a projectile of a smaller caliber is centered so as to permit firing the projectile within a larger-caliber weapon. The carrier fills the bore of the weapon from which the projectile is fired; it is normally discarded a short distance from the muzzle. -> dictionary.comOriginally posted by SpecOps87:Thanks for the enlightment
Anyway, can anybody share what the following represent and mean. HEAT,SABOT,HESH,STAFF,APFSDS,SLAP or any other types of tank rounds avb.?
I know HEAT stands for High Explosive Anti-Tank,HESH stands for High Explosive Squash Head right? But what are their uses respectively?
Thanks, and once again, pardon my youthful ignorance.
Its a common designation for an thin armor piercing round made of some dense metal.
STAFF : Smart Target Activated Fire and Forget round. Its special tank munition, that once fired, it would fly above its target, and identify and destroy the it by an explosively formed penetrator from above .
APFSDS : Armor piercing fin stabilising discarded sabot. Sabot round, except that its penetrator has fins attached to stabilise itself in flight. Kinda like an arrow.
SLAP: Special Load Armor Piercing?? .50 cal round capable of penetrating lightly armored vehicles.
Usefulnes: All of the above kills vehicles with prejudice. All kinetic based weapon. (Except STAFF) Longer the distance, less penetration.
HEAT rounds, or rounds that use explosively form penetrators, retain their penetration ability over whatever distances. However, they are also slower projectiles compared to the Kinetic munitions. -
U can actually fire e others types of rds with rifled gun by adding a slipping driving band , also rifled gun gives FSAPDS additional spin assists in clean discard of sabot at muzzle but r longer n heavier then smoothbore
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
SLAP:Saboted Light Armour Penetrator.
SLAP: Special Load Armor Piercing?? .50 cal round capable of penetrating lightly armored vehicles.
-
Our SLAP armour piercing capability
Penetrate a 25mm thick class 3 homogenous armour steel with BHN 321 to 375 hardness at 1,000 m or 30mm at 183 m at normal incident angle -
Oh yeah.. hahah I couldn't remember that one off hand.Originally posted by saline:SLAP:Saboted Light Armour Penetrator.
Yeah, AFPSDS can be shot out of rifled barrels. I think the Challenger 2 series have done something to stop the penetrator from being "rifled." -
I noe this is not related to this thread......... But this is regarding to armoured vehicles.........
1) Why do our newly designed armoured vehicles do not have added armour "tank skirt" to protect the suspension tracks?
2) I have seen armoured vehicles have baskets and jerry cans hanging arround outside the vehicles. Why do they do that, I mean I am sure the cans and tool boxes do not have protection against even 5.56mm small arms rite? -
Well if they r filled with compacted sand it can
-
Response to point 1: I agree with you that it will be good to have the skirts but assuming that we do have these skirts i guess it won't take much time to put those on prior to war.Originally posted by equlus84:I noe this is not related to this thread......... But this is regarding to armoured vehicles.........
1) Why do our newly designed armoured vehicles do not have added armour "tank skirt" to protect the suspension tracks?
2) I have seen armoured vehicles have baskets and jerry cans hanging arround outside the vehicles. Why do they do that, I mean I am sure the cans and tool boxes do not have protection against even 5.56mm small arms rite?
Response to point 2: The interior of A vehicles is very cramped! SM1 and the Ultra M113 are good examples so if can carry things outside then will put them outside.
There are examples in past wars where crews will attach extra tracks to the exterior of their vehicles for added protectection. -
Just nice for narrow roads in the jungle