More tank questions
-
Question #1:
Are Singapore tanks - AMX13sm1, AMX10, Centurion etc ever have roof-mounted .50 HMG?
Usually all I ever see is the 7.62 GPMG.
Israeli, American and many other countries including China usually mount the .5 or both .5 and 7.62. -
Question #2:
Are any SAF vehicles: tanks, IFV, rovers etc ever painted in camouflage?
Do we have an "official" vehicle camouflage scheme?
How come we don't paint our vehicles in camouflage?
Is painting a vehicle camouflage useful or not? -
Even if you paint in camo, you'd still need the camo net & stuff to make it really hard to spot.Originally posted by moca:Question #2:
Are any SAF vehicles: tanks, IFV, rovers etc ever painted in camouflage?
Do we have an "official" vehicle camouflage scheme?
How come we don't paint our vehicles in camouflage?
Is painting a vehicle camouflage useful or not? -
Yeah, why not this, why not that? This type of question where got end wan?
The answer to yr question is very simple: Because u r not the decision maker lor!!!
-
I have seen SAF V-200 with camo paint. But most of the time, just green colour.
Does camo paint help? I believe it does. It does not hide or conceal the tank but does make it a a bit harder to spot from a distance. -
I think the jokes on you... displaying your idiocy for all to see,Originally posted by :Yeah, why not this, why not that? This type of question where got end wan?
The answer to yr question is very simple: Because u r not the decision maker lor!!! 
-
the roof mounted guns are for limited air defence. 0.5 inch vs 7.62mm its up to the army.
the camo for the tanks (or other vehicles for that matter) are subjective. what's important is the type of paint used. some are radar absorbent and/or IR proof. the least type is that they reduce the thermal signature. -
Roof mounted MGs have the dual purpose of limited air defence and for attacking infantrymen.Originally posted by moca:Question #1:
Are Singapore tanks - AMX13sm1, AMX10, Centurion etc ever have roof-mounted .50 HMG?
Usually all I ever see is the 7.62 GPMG.
Israeli, American and many other countries including China usually mount the .5 or both .5 and 7.62.
What weapons we deploy depends on the doctrine of the armed forces which in turn determines the purpose of the vehicle in battle.
For the case SM1, we are more concerned about the infantrymen as we are like riding shotgun for the AI troopers on their M113 or BX. -
Actually your Question #2 is made up of many sub-questions! So i will answer them point by point.Originally posted by moca:Question #2:
Are any SAF vehicles: tanks, IFV, rovers etc ever painted in camouflage?
Do we have an "official" vehicle camouflage scheme?
How come we don't paint our vehicles in camouflage?
Is painting a vehicle camouflage useful or not?
Yes, i have seen some older vehicles in the past being painted in camouflaged scheme. But this practice is no longer in use.
No, we do not have an 'official' vehicle camouflage scheme.
I have no idea too! Maybe having no one particular camouflage will be beneficial when being deployed in different surroundings.
Painting the vehicles in camouflage will certainly help but it also depends on the surroundings which the vehicle is in. If the vehicle is camouflaged for jungle terrain but is used in urban warfare then it will stick out like a sore thumb. -
Thank you and R.E.S.P.E.C.T...Originally posted by tankee1981:Actually your Question #2 is made up of many sub-questions! So i will answer them point by point.
Yes, i have seen some older vehicles in the past being painted in camouflaged scheme. But this practice is no longer in use.
No, we do not have an 'official' vehicle camouflage scheme.
I have no idea too! Maybe having no one particular camouflage will be beneficial when being deployed in different surroundings.
Painting the vehicles in camouflage will certainly help but it also depends on the surroundings which the vehicle is in. If the vehicle is camouflaged for jungle terrain but is used in urban warfare then it will stick out like a sore thumb. -
But isn't it nice to have something to shoot enemy soft-skinned vehicles with? I know the accompanying AFVs with their 40/50 can do that. But I find it strange that the AMX13, likely to spearhead, has only 7.62 on roof-mount and there is already a co-ax 7.62.Originally posted by tankee1981:Roof mounted MGs have the dual purpose of limited air defence and for attacking infantrymen.
What weapons we deploy depends on the doctrine of the armed forces which in turn determines the purpose of the vehicle in battle.
For the case SM1, we are more concerned about the infantrymen as we are like riding shotgun for the AI troopers on their M113 or BX. -
Usually in practice, the AMX13 is deployed together with the BX or M113 and AI troopers, and not as stand alone. (I don't think I am giving anything away here am I? It's been made pretty public.)
Hence the BX can take care of the soft skin, the AMX can take care of the harder skin and the AI the opposing infantry.
Oh, and of course now with the Igla mounted M113s, those are to take care of aircraft.
.5 mounted on top of tanks without some sort of protection (like the shielding found on the M113s) make for open targets when the bullets start flying. -
That's true in practice as all the other vehicles have .50, 25mm etc.Originally posted by insouciant:Usually in practice, the AMX13 is deployed together with the BX or M113 and AI troopers, and not as stand alone. (I don't think I am giving anything away here am I? It's been made pretty public.)
Hence the BX can take care of the soft skin, the AMX can take care of the harder skin and the AI the opposing infantry.
Oh, and of course now with the Igla mounted M113s, those are to take care of aircraft.
.5 mounted on top of tanks without some sort of protection (like the shielding found on the M113s) make for open targets when the bullets start flying.
But because the CIS .50 can fire 2 kinds of ammo - eg SLAP on one side and normal ball on the other side - with a simple flick of the switch, I would have thought that this would be the perfect roof-top weapon that can take care of all roles required of a MG.
The lack of shield problem applies to all unshielded weapons including the roof-mounted 7.62. -
Here're some questions on armour protection:
Apparently, Level 3 armour protection (eg US M8 AGS) can only withstand up to 30mm cannon.
This would mean that a dedicated AT round like the RPG-7 or our Matador and 84 will definitely make mincemeat out of the average light tank or IFV, right?
So what about the other types of modern laminate armour or ERA? Can they withstand frontal hits from RPGs, 84, Matador etc?
Can any tank withstand a frontal hit from another tank cannon of around 100 to 125mm?
I ask this because of reports of M1 Abrams being disabled by RPGs. Of course, these are usually scored on vulnerable areas not the front. -
Depends on the distance and gun. I read somewhere once that M1A2's frontal armor was impenetrable by Sabot rounds from T-72s at more than 1km. Not sure about Shaped Charge Warheads tho, too many variables.
-
Am in London right now on holiday. 3rd trip in 20 years.
Went to the Imperial War Museum yesterday. Was a little disappointed as the number of big exhibits were quite few due to the limited indoor space and there was nothing displayed outdoors other 2 naval guns.
There were only few of the more well-known tanks.
* German Jadgzpanzer, with at least four fist-sized oles in the hull.
* Czech-made 1955 T-34
* Saladin Armoured car
* M3 Grant (Monty's Command tank)
* Matilda
* Churchill
* M4 Sherman
Of course there were other pieces like artillery, rockets, aircrafts etc. But all in all, quite few.
What amazes you, after looking at so many pictures of tanks, is to stand near one.
The size of the things is very overwhelming.
The biggest surprise was the M3 Grant. Though a "medium" tank, it was pretty damn big. It was the tallest tank of all the exhibits. The Brit 'Grant' version actually has one less turret than the US "Lee" version. So the "Lee" must be even taller.