SG terrain suitable for MBT?
-
I heard of something similar as well. Current BX chassis being unable to sustain the stress of the 120mm gun. Not to mention the stability factor.
Heh. I remember a similar attempt by some "Friends" a long time ago. Trying to mount a 120mm on their "light tank." The turret cracked. -
Singapore acquiring Leopard 2A4.
Ah... satisfying closure tot his thread.
-
that's becos the leopard 2A4 has a ground pressure lower then the AMX-13SM1.Originally posted by moca:Singapore acquiring Leopard 2A4.
Ah... satisfying closure tot his thread.
but other then that... alot of our neighbour's bridge wont survive the weight.. so.. i think we gonna need to bring along lots of MLC 70 bridge. -
Many new MBT have a lower ground pressure than the AMX-13.Originally posted by tripwire:that's becos the leopard 2A4 has a ground pressure lower then the AMX-13SM1.
but other then that... alot of our neighbour's bridge wont survive the weight.. so.. i think we gonna need to bring along lots of MLC 70 bridge.
Anyway, this announcement puts an end to noobs saying MBT's are not suitable for us over and over again - even though we got out first MBTs 30 over years ago. -
Words right out of my mouth.Originally posted by moca:Many new MBT have a lower ground pressure than the AMX-13.
Anyway, this announcement puts an end to noobs saying MBT's are not suitable for us over and over again - even though we got out first MBTs 30 over years ago.
So should I close this thread?
Since the question has been answered... Haha -
Once n for all
-
+1 before the thread ends and close
-
YES!!Originally posted by ^Delta^:Words right out of my mouth.
So should I close this thread?
Since the question has been answered... Haha -
LOL, when the new LT come out then the thread reopen again!!!
Read Mindef report, Leo2 is to replace some of the SM, not all!!!!
In reality, Leo 2 I believe is not to replace SM1 at all but perhaps the Tempest!!! -
Originally posted by gary1910:
I agree with you. Who in their right mind will replace a light tank with a MBT man. Personally I think the only reason the Mindef report mentioned the AMX-13s is because our Centurions are still very sensitive. That Mindef report was meant as an annoucement for the Leopards, not the Centurions.
LOL, when the new LT come out then the thread reopen again!!!
Read Mindef report, Leo2 is to replace [b]some of the SM, not all!!!!
In reality, Leo 2 I believe is not to replace SM1 at all but perhaps the Tempest!!!
[/b] -
They did use the words "replace SOME", not all, the SM1.Originally posted by fallin:I agree with you. Who in their right mind will replace a light tank with a MBT man. Personally I think the only reason the Mindef report mentioned the AMX-13s is because our Centurions are still very sensitive. That Mindef report was meant as an annoucement for the Leopards, not the Centurions.
So we'll get 66 Leopard 2A4 to replace 3 SM1's.
-
That's a possibility... but come to think of it shouldn't we be using our Tempests for what the SM1 is doing? Now that we got the Cat?
Hard to say leh, seriously the SM1 are not doing much even in our current armour formations. After all the tatics were written around its limitations, I don't think the AT duties would actually fall on it in actual ops, it's just too slow and vulnerable.
Then again, we can't realistically expect to replace all 300+ SM1s in short order, there are crews to retrain and tatics to rewrite. I think armour is going to be interesting in the years to come. -
Nah, SAF is not going to replace SM1 with MBT, remember the special requirement for Primus, 30 tons & below, plus width of 3m max???
That is to support our light mechnised bde, i.e. LT with IFV/APC.
If SAF do not have plan for LT, why do SAF has such limitation for Primus in the first place????
LT is part of SAF's doctrine , it is not going to change, the reason is of course due to terrain!!!! -
Lol!
The narrow terrain requires us to have Light tanks on the offense and exploit breakthrus. But the narrow terrain also means that more firepower is required assault defended positions, and thats where MBTs come in.
Both ways, the terrain requires us to use LTs and MBTs in different ways wad. -
Actually, I think the centurions got other uses such as we can modify them to become ARV or bridge-layer. We could also turn them into urban warfare vehicles like putting a remote controlled 25mm auto-canon on it,and create some space to file in at least 4 AIs. We could even make a 52 cal SPG by mounting a FH2000 gun on it.
For the AMX-13, we can turn them into armoured recon vehicles by removing the main gun and fitting an auto-canon. We could also make them into our organic PDF division as a armoured force. A coastal defense force can be set up by mounting a 120mm mortar or perhaps make it into something like the Jadpanther of the WW2 -
I think the MBTs are gotten in a large part to deal with the northern PT-91, T-80U question. Once again the balance is restored in sorts... I mean if they can operate MBTs, we can wait a while , see if it works, and try to get something better.
I've haven't hard of any armed forces using Light Tanks as an offensive weapon though, I wonder how well it fares against proper anti armour defence? -
the advantage of a 120mm gun will be that it will same round as SG MBTs. So will minimize logistical burden.Originally posted by glock:I agree that for a light tank a 105 mm gun will suffice. Also, it can carry more rounds & stay in the fight longer - but keep it away from an MBT. Anyway carry two or three rounds of latest 105 mm APFSDS rounds for self defence against an MBT.
However, to kill a modern MBT, make available a few options - AH64, Spike, Maverick, LGBs and to top it off a battalion or two of own MBTs with 120 mm will do the trick.
Also 120mm seems to the the "standard" NATO tank gun calibre. I think it will result in lower cost of operations and upgrade path....
Althought you are right. a 105mm APFSDS should be able ample as self protection against MBTs. -
SAF has a hi / lo mix of tanks with the current Tempests and SM1s. Replacing the Tempests with Leopards is the first phase of the replacement process. The next phase will be to replace the SM1s.
In truth, one needs both types to do different jobs in different scenarios. Having both MBTs and LTs is ideal ( and costly ) but it gives flexibility in any given scenario.
Also, light tanks have very limited success in real wars - it is usually the medium and heavy tanks that are more effective. Also, with modern man portable AT weapons which are so easily & readily available , LTs are extremely vulnerable. A reasonably up to date ( and cheap ) RPG or equivalent can easily disable or destroy a light tank.
Remember that M48s ( USA) & Centurions ( Australian ) were used reasonably effectively in the Vietnam war. -
Perhaps the point of having the MBTs is to fight in urban terrain while the light tanks duke it out in the jungle.
Serious, I can't imagine an MBT smashing flat the trees out right just to push its way through. No MBT has been employed in a strict jungle terrain unless the jungle had a pathway with all the trees chopped off. -
LTs are only useful if doctrine states that you are always moving under deep growth o r cover, therefore, the size and profile is very important. I would consider them a 2nd line of attack, using numbers to overwhelm and soften whatever opposition the MBTs have dealt with.
Deep tropical tank fighting, the LTs could still have a chance. Not in an urban setting. -
THe swedes for example, had designed a few tanks that could suit their needs in the forested areas for themselves in the past..
HOwever, they already moved back to the 2A4s and 2(S) leopards..
they are then backed up by CV-90 IFVs with 40mm bofors cannon..
so in singapore's setting.. do we really need a light tank? -
Actually, i CAN imagine them crushing trees to pave a way thru. I can't imagine LTs do the same though. ha =DOriginally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:Perhaps the point of having the MBTs is to fight in urban terrain while the light tanks duke it out in the jungle.
Serious, I can't imagine an MBT smashing flat the trees out right just to push its way through. No MBT has been employed in a strict jungle terrain unless the jungle had a pathway with all the trees chopped off.
Besides, I think the whole idea is to flatten the trees in the preparatory bombardment if it is indeed necessary. -
If the enemy attacks in such a situation, you would not like to be in the middle of a "jungle clearing" exercise. In fact, Jungles are perfect hiding places for infantry, and just imagine them waiting to ambush and let loose a volley of many many anti-tank missiles. Some of the latest Russian anti-tank missiles can dent the Merkava and destroy/disable. Have no delusions about them tearing our Leopard 2s apart with ease.Originally posted by Shotgun:Actually, i CAN imagine them crushing trees to pave a way thru. I can't imagine LTs do the same though. ha =D
Besides, I think the whole idea is to flatten the trees in the preparatory bombardment if it is indeed necessary. -
Sending tanks into a jungle is generally a bad idea, be you in a LT or not. In that area tanks serve more for fire support then actual armour assualt.
Not sure about Meky being the most heavily armoured tank in the word, given its spaced configuration means that it can survive and reduce damage from hits after being penetrated which other tanks might not. The Cat relies on a more conventional method of preventing penetration altogeher, so how it responds to ATGM will be a different ball game. I don't think it will be "easily" torn apart ala. T-72 though, unless you are talking the later generation ATGMs. -
There is a CV90 with a high pressure 120mm cannon actually. I was actually more under the impression that the SAF would try out that concept with the Bionix, i.e. fit a 120mm cannon like the one used in the CV90, or a L7 105mm cannon (there is an Israeli round that claims to have similar performance characteristics to the 120mm rounds).Originally posted by Pitot:THe swedes for example, had designed a few tanks that could suit their needs in the forested areas for themselves in the past..
HOwever, they already moved back to the 2A4s and 2(S) leopards..
they are then backed up by CV-90 IFVs with 40mm bofors cannon..
so in singapore's setting.. do we really need a light tank?
But they seem to have decided it was high time to get a heavy hitter, obviously geared for urban warfare. It's likely they would upgrade it to 2A6 standard somewhat.