SAF armoured 5 tonner
-
Well, people always mistreat Infantry as garbage....Originally posted by moca:No man, I think this is our next gen. of light tank.
Actually, the more I look at it, the more they look like garbage trucks. 
-
Look good...
-
Well, getting your pants caught down, a tonner is the last place you'd want to be. Typically in the US Army, infantry are transported by armour. You don't see the US Army using trucks for transporting infantry within a theatre of operations anymore.Originally posted by moca:SAF has more trucks than APCs, so we will continue to travel in trucks.
Also, driving all the way to the fight in AFV convoys may not always be best or evenpossible due to many reasons including terrain, enemy activity, etc etc. The US is roadbound which makes them juicy targets.
As SAF infantry, we have ABSOLUTELY NO armoured assets. They have to be loaned to the battalion depending on mission and they are not always available.
But trucks, we have integral to the battalion.
In a typical battalion/company mission, we get dropped off by trucks and other softskin transports in a safe area first. Then the trucks bugger off.
We harbour in that area, usually a patch of forest etc, until at night when we trek through the forest to the target. The path would be marked by scouts during the day time with luminous markers.
A company of infantrymen moving in the darkness in the forest is no stealth, mind you. We sound like a herd of wild elephants. -
from what i understand, they are called 5 tonners cos they can haul 5 tons of load, not cos of their weight.Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:The tonner won't be called a 5-tonner anymore.
Rather 10-20tonne, after you add that much protection, new engine, and what not.
Truth to tell, this day and age, you only stuff infantry into IFVs, not tonners. These are meant for logistics. -
Whatever it is, adding all that armour on is going to cost some and weigh some.Originally posted by beavan:from what i understand, they are called 5 tonners cos they can haul 5 tons of load, not cos of their weight.
As it is, these things only need some recoiless rifle or a RPG-7 to blow them apart. -
It's kinda like the M113.
In Israel, the troopers used to refuse to ride inside as one RPG round would cause the vehicle to explode and burn them all to death.
They would rather sit atop the vehicle and take a chance with sniper bullets. As least their remains can be identified!
After modification there is now more confidence in the protection of the M113.
But what can you do? The RPGs or RRs can take apart practically everything these days. -
I think between the M113 and the 5-tonner, I will at least feel much safer with the former, if the former was given the ERA fit or some degree of passive armour.Originally posted by moca:It's kinda like the M113.
In Israel, the troopers used to refuse to ride inside as one RPG round would cause the vehicle to explode and burn them all to death.
They would rather sit atop the vehicle and take a chance with sniper bullets. As least their remains can be identified!
After modification there is now more confidence in the protection of the M113.
But what can you do? The RPGs or RRs can take apart practically everything these days.
And you could always hook up a remote controlled turret to a M113. -
i tot us still use trucks to transport troops? donno if black hawk down is true see them using trucks and now they have the casspir or something the truck which has a v shaped hull used for transport / mine clearing based on a african truck.
edit:they oso have the cougar H,MRAP and some other trucks which they say are mine,IED proof
links:
MRAP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP_%28armored_vehicle%29
cougar H http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar_%28vehicle%29
casspir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casspir -
they still ise truck alright but more for logistic stuff such as food. it would be nice to have your MRE without any holes in it.
-
I still prefer the original 5 tonner. And RR or RPG will just shoot thru the covering mah.
But i hope they change plastic to just camo canvas for the sides..
you know why?
its so BLOODY HOT when the sun is high up! Its like oven! -
This is with reference to the recent news article on SAF providing more protection for the canvas covered 5 ton trucks. The level of protection is supposedly for low intensity conflicts. From the picture in the Straits Times article, it appears to have armour plates attached to the sides the trucks.
The low intensity conflicts that SAF is thinking about must be against an opposition armed with sticks and stones. That is the only way the troops in that armoured truck will ever hope to survive.
If the truck were to encounter an Improvised Explosive Device (IED), the consequences will not be good. Generally an IED blast is not focused and vented upwards. In the case of the armoured truck, the armoured side walls and the wooden plank floor will channel force upwards through where the troops are. The armour plates now become a liability instead of protection. If that is not lethal enough, the two spare tyres carried below the truck bed will come crashing through like a battering ram.
Now in the case of the pressure plate landmine, with the truck traveling forward, the explosive force will direct the front tire/s, axle and other related automotive parts upwards. All this shrapnel will go into the front cabin with relative ease.
The firing ports are usually overrated and a grenade hazard. A system like a remotely operated machine gun will be safer eg CROWS. Last but not the least it needs an additional skirt made of fencing material to trigger the fuzes of rocket propelled grenades.
In my opinion, if Singapore Technologies can design a armoured personnel carrier like the Bionix, it should not be a stretch to design a vehicle with more protection. After all the principles of these vehicles are fairly simple. No load above the wheels, smooth and Vshaped hull for the bottom of the truck and the use civilian automotive transmission -
I think it is a good idea to equipt our future peace-keeping troops with better armoured vehicles as i forsee an increase in peace-keeping missions for SAF.Originally posted by M551Sheridian:i tot us still use trucks to transport troops? donno if black hawk down is true see them using trucks and now they have the casspir or something the truck which has a v shaped hull used for transport / mine clearing based on a african truck.
edit:they oso have the cougar H,MRAP and some other trucks which they say are mine,IED proof
links:
MRAP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP_%28armored_vehicle%29
cougar H http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar_%28vehicle%29
casspir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casspir
The armoured 5-tonner is a good start but for greater protection and fire power, the Terrex will be a better idea. The US Marines' Cougar H can be a cheaper alternative to the Terrex.
-
It is a truck, for transportation, with armour added. It is not a fighting vehicle.
-
I've always liked the Aussie Bushmaster. Cold water on tap! How cool is that?Originally posted by tankee1981:The armoured 5-tonner is a good start but for greater protection and fire power, the Terrex will be a better idea. The US Marines' Cougar H can be a cheaper alternative to the Terrex. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushmaster_IMV