SAF truck OK for cargo but not safe for troops

• M551Sheridian

  25 Jun 07, 17:46

  erm to the guy tat said why the leopard and not the m1 abrams
  
  buying a M1 here would probably be suicide we would not have enuff money to support the amount of fuel it burns.... and some of the abrams pic being damaged... seems like the crew escaped or something damaged but certainly not destroyed
• gaoxingdcf

  25 Jun 07, 23:37

  I really questioned the writer did serve NS... If he does,he muz have seated in a 3 tonner or 5 tonner at least.. Nw is the SAF juz add a few plates of amour he started to make noise... very unpro....
• CM06

  26 Jun 07, 12:45

  Maybe he's a scrap metal dealer - the kind who buy illegal metal and lost out on a bid to supply the armour plates for the 5-tons... hehe Just joking.
• airgrinder

  26 Jun 07, 13:08

  Originally posted by LRRP:

  From ST Forum today. Do you agree with him?
  
  I dont..i think many of his points doesnt hold water
  
  http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_130242.html
  
  _____________________________________________________________
  
  I REFER to the news article on the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) providing more protection for the canvas covered five tonne trucks ('Increased protection for troops'; ST, May 21). The level of protection is supposedly for low-intensity conflicts. From the picture in the article, it appears armoured plates are attached to the sides of the truck.
  
  The low-intensity conflicts the SAF is thinking of must be against an opposition armed with sticks and stones. That is the only way troops in that armoured truck can survive.
  
  If the truck encounters an improvised explosive device (IED), the consequences will not be good. Generally, an IED blast is not focused and vents upwards.
  
  In the case of the armoured truck, the armoured side walls and wooden plank floor will channel force upwards through where the troops are. The armoured plates now become a liability. 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 a pressure plate landmine, with the truck travelling forward, the explosive force will direct the front tyres, 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, for example, a common remotely operated weapon station (Crows). Last but not least, it needs an additional protective sheet to trigger the fuses of rocket-propelled grenades.
  
  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 V-shaped hull for the bottom of the truck, and civilian automotive transmission.
  
  The five-tonne trucks should carry cargo, not troops.
  
  Alfred Loo Swee Kian

  the author wants tanks to replace all our tonners.....
  
  could be a super protective parent of a kid going NS...
• CM06

  26 Jun 07, 13:38

  ask the kid to volunteer navy /airforce.. heh
• SingaporeTyrannosaur

  26 Jun 07, 20:50

  Maybe if he can afford the increase in taxes to equip us with enough money to replace all our trooplift trucks with Bx2s without making noise then maybe, if not he's just an empty can making much noise.
  
  In any case any armour on a tonner is better then none, as recent experience in Iraq has shown. Most troops just won't get the chance to go around in AFVs and will have to resort to a truck, and the canvas topped option is NOT something you want to go into. If you did read "The Long Road Home", you will have read about the harrowing account of a bunch of troops in a canvas-topped truck that was ambushed, by the end of the ambush out of all the soldiers in the truck all but one was wounded (and most quite seriously) and one was dead. When the truck got back to base blood was literally leaking off the back of the truck. Some dudes on the truck were hit multiple times.
  
  The injuries taken during the ambush were from small arms fire, fire that could be stopped by simply up armouring the truck and keeping out most of the danger being thrown at them, giving the troops time to react or get the truck out of dodge. It does not turn the truck into a tank, but simply something safer.
  
  This dude simply does not understand logistics.