SAF MBT
-
Its so horrible...why'd we buy it?Originally posted by moca:Newer tanks than the AMX-13 are being retired from front line service.
The fact that the AMX-13 is still in service is NOT because it is still a sound AFV. I think it is simply because Singapore does not consider having newer or better tanks a huge priority - for a variety of reasons that I do not know.
The AMX-13 is an extremely odd design in both the chassis and turret, making it unsuitabe for most kinds of upgrading.
The turret design seems to be unique to the AMX-13 and maybe one other European tank also used a similar design. But no one else consider this odd turret design worth continuing, not even the French themselves.
No point wasting any more money on the AMX-13. -
The AMX13 was considered decent during the time we bought it. If it's meant to be a deceptive move, it's pretty darn cheap form of psychological warfare.
-
Exactly as LaserLordz said, at that time it was good enough.Originally posted by fallin:Its so horrible...why'd we buy it?
But the AMX-13 were discarded in the 70's by India and Israel, both of whom have used them in combat and found them to be completely worthless. The small gun calibre problem was improved upon with a bigger gun, 90mm or even 105mm. But the fact that it couldn't fire on the move by 1973 was already considered dire. The other thing that could not be improved upon was its thin armour, resulting in loss of precious tank crews during combat.
The original masters of upgrading - the Israelis - upgraded the gun to 90mm but couldn't do anything for the armour, so they gave it up. (The upgraded M4 Sherman with 105mm gun was considered a better choice over the AMX-13 and served them longer.)
So in a sense it was a "bluff" for, as impressive as 300 of these tanks were in 1970's, they were already obsolete by then. (However, it was a good bluff as in those days, Malaysia had only some armoured cars and Indonesia some PT-76.)
So if they were obsolete by 1973, what are they worth in today 2006? -
Nothing more than mobile fire bases for POI duties, I'm afraid. They will still form a formidable defensive gauntlet.Originally posted by moca:Exactly as LaserLordz said, at that time it was good enough.
But the AMX-13 were discarded in the 70's by India and Israel, both of whom have used them in combat and found them to be completely worthless. The small gun calibre problem was improved upon with a bigger gun, 90mm or even 105mm. But the fact that it couldn't fire on the move by 1973 was already considered dire. The other thing that could not be improved upon was its thin armour, resulting in loss of precious tank crews during combat.
The original masters of upgrading - the Israelis - upgraded the gun to 90mm but couldn't do anything for the armour, so they gave it up. (The upgraded M4 Sherman with 105mm gun was considered a better choice over the AMX-13 and served them longer.)
So in a sense it was a "bluff" for, as impressive as 300 of these tanks were in 1970's, they were already obsolete by then. (However, it was a good bluff as in those days, Malaysia had only some armoured cars and Indonesia some PT-76.)
So if they were obsolete by 1973, what are they worth in today 2006? -
Suddenly, I feel sad for ArmourOriginally posted by moca:Exactly as LaserLordz said, at that time it was good enough.
But the AMX-13 were discarded in the 70's by India and Israel, both of whom have used them in combat and found them to be completely worthless. The small gun calibre problem was improved upon with a bigger gun, 90mm or even 105mm. But the fact that it couldn't fire on the move by 1973 was already considered dire. The other thing that could not be improved upon was its thin armour, resulting in loss of precious tank crews during combat.
The original masters of upgrading - the Israelis - upgraded the gun to 90mm but couldn't do anything for the armour, so they gave it up. (The upgraded M4 Sherman with 105mm gun was considered a better choice over the AMX-13 and served them longer.)
So in a sense it was a "bluff" for, as impressive as 300 of these tanks were in 1970's, they were already obsolete by then. (However, it was a good bluff as in those days, Malaysia had only some armoured cars and Indonesia some PT-76.)
So if they were obsolete by 1973, what are they worth in today 2006?
-
Incredible... our Amour NSFs using tanks that are much older then them... from a design as old as their dad....
The 75mm gun was from a design used in the WW2 German Panther tank.
the reason why they mate the gun to the turret is so that they can have a auto-loader and eliminate the need for a human loader...
future technological improvements, it is no longer require to do that.. the russian T-55 onwards have autoloaders so does the french Leclerc tank.
the AMX-13 was actually built as a "tank destroyer"... during the post ww2 when tank destroyer concept is still alive....
it mounted a powerful (at that point in time) 75mm that can defeat MBTs (at that time).
has a lower and small profile during to use of auto-loader (again a innovation in the 50s).
has rapid fire due to the auto loader (at that point in time)....
relatively cheap to build....
it is meant to surprise enemy tanks and destroythem with rapid 75mm shells... that is why its armour is so weak. -
I agree with the above to a large extent. Unfortunately, even the upgraded SM1 is considered obsolete compared to the its modern foreign counterparts.Originally posted by moca:Exactly as LaserLordz said, at that time it was good enough.
But the AMX-13 were discarded in the 70's by India and Israel, both of whom have used them in combat and found them to be completely worthless. The small gun calibre problem was improved upon with a bigger gun, 90mm or even 105mm. But the fact that it couldn't fire on the move by 1973 was already considered dire. The other thing that could not be improved upon was its thin armour, resulting in loss of precious tank crews during combat.
The original masters of upgrading - the Israelis - upgraded the gun to 90mm but couldn't do anything for the armour, so they gave it up. (The upgraded M4 Sherman with 105mm gun was considered a better choice over the AMX-13 and served them longer.)
So in a sense it was a "bluff" for, as impressive as 300 of these tanks were in 1970's, they were already obsolete by then. (However, it was a good bluff as in those days, Malaysia had only some armoured cars and Indonesia some PT-76.)
So if they were obsolete by 1973, what are they worth in today 2006?
SAF did not think that the replacement of SM1 is of high piority because it is more than sufficient in our regional context. Currently, even our old SM1 is a good match to the armoured vehicles which our neighbours have. However, as our neighbours increased their military budget and have plans to develop armoured divisions(Malaysia), therefore the recent stronger urgency to replace it.
-
our SM1 is as old as our previous Senior Minister... time for a new SM!
(actually if SAF's Centurion doesn't exist officially, the new tanks won't exist officially as well)
even our Australian friends are getting M1A1 tanks... -
Not if the seller has to declare the sale. Most European countries have transparent defence sales.Originally posted by chillycraps:our SM1 is as old as our previous Senior Minister... time for a new SM!
(actually if SAF's Centurion doesn't exist officially, the new tanks won't exist officially as well) -
As far as I know.. Israel is not considered 'European'..Originally posted by ChineseJunk:Not if the seller has to declare the sale. Most European countries have transparent defence sales.
-
Pressure forward, not back to ancient history.Originally posted by siaokao:As far as I know.. Israel is not considered 'European'.. -
Originally posted by ChineseJunk:Pressure forward, not back to ancient history.
-
err.. sorry, i did not get the meaning..Originally posted by ChineseJunk:Pressure forward, not back to ancient history.
-
I don't mind getting Merkava~Originally posted by siaokao:As far as I know.. Israel is not considered 'European'.. 
It's 41SAR's motto. Oopz is this classified?Originally posted by siaokao:err.. sorry, i did not get the meaning.. -
Why would a motto be classified?Originally posted by chillycraps:It's 41SAR's motto. Oopz is this classified? -
Hmm, seems the BX2 is the tip of the spear that the SM1 was never a part of.
But hey it's nearly 2007, high time to replace it. Maybe they'll spring a surprise on us like the Primus. -
Hmm, seems the BX2 is the tip of the spear that the SM1 was never a part of.
yes Maybe the will Surprise us... Maybe Surprise us with a T-80...and i will Be glad...
But hey it's nearly 2007, high time to replace it. Maybe they'll spring a surprise on us like the Primus.
-
Surprise yes......But T-80?Originally posted by Seth35:yes Maybe the will Surprise us... Maybe Surprise us with a T-80...and i will Be glad... -
I was actually thinking why not just buy the technology of the BMP-3 from the Russian and try to put a 105mm or 120mm NATO standard tank gun onto it. Many countries have already hybridised Russian and western technologies together. Besides, the BMP-3F is amphibious capable, we can modify it for the 21DIV, the MT-LB is also a good choice, very low profile
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Hmm, seems the BX2 is the tip of the spear that the SM1 was never a part of.
But hey it's nearly 2007, high time to replace it. Maybe they'll spring a surprise on us like the Primus. -
Heh, they really should stop showing the SM1 on our Army ads though, as much as they try to make it look garang, any person who knows his basic armour will know it's mostly wayang, and if we put it on our ads it just goes to show that we don't really have much to offer at all
T-80? Nah... was hoping for a Merk (though it's kinda big and heavy for us) or an M1A1 HA or something. -
Dave seem to be hinting a European tanks is in the pipeline?!?
Upgrade to A6 I hope.
When it appear in future NDP, it will certainly have the same impact as 1969!!! -
if the *ahem*centurion*ahem* didn't appear in NDP, what makes us think that the replacement will?Originally posted by gary1910:Dave seem to be hinting a European tanks is in the pipeline?!?
Upgrade to A6 I hope.
When it appear in future NDP, it will certainly have the same impact as 1969!!! -
Hiya.. they dun display such heavy tanks coz damage our beautiful roads mah..Originally posted by chillycraps:if the *ahem*centurion*ahem* didn't appear in NDP, what makes us think that the replacement will?
Last time our M60 do a drive by.. they need to resurface roads leh.. -
SAF getting T-80 is very unlikely because Malaysia is a partner of the Ukranian tank manufacturer of T-80.Originally posted by Seth35:yes Maybe the will Surprise us... Maybe Surprise us with a T-80...and i will Be glad...