More Leo 2s
-
According to today's TODAY paper, SAF has decided to get another 36 Leo 2. That plus the original number ordered means we have over 100 of them coming our way.
Interesting part is according to the report, the Leo 2 is supposed to replace the SM1. I thought SAF previously said they would NOT phase out all SM1s? -
Hmm, i expected more Leos coming in. Afterall, some Leos were supposed to be set aside for other purposes ....
-
come now ... did anyone expect the SM1s to really keep soldiering on ? ... be honest -
"A few" more will also be acquired for "spares" as well.Originally posted by sgf:According to today's TODAY paper, SAF has decided to get another 36 Leo 2. That plus the original number ordered means we have over 100 of them coming our way.
Interesting part is according to the report, the Leo 2 is supposed to replace the SM1. I thought SAF previously said they would NOT phase out all SM1s?
We sure need alot of "spares"
-
Btw, how does the SAF determine the number to be bought? By estimating how many regiments they want to issue the tanks to?
-
multiply that by 2 for reserves. add a couple of few for training.Originally posted by fallin:Btw, how does the SAF determine the number to be bought? By estimating how many regiments they want to issue the tanks to? -
I won't be surprised if they decide to refit some of them to A5 standard.. in theory it is possible.
The German Bundeswehr Heer is currently undergoing considerable downsizing... -
Of course they are. There aren't really any more significant threats to Germany anymore. Their traditional enemy France is now their best friend. Germany is one again and the Cold War's over. The only issue I can see is the rise of Russia again, but since there isn't really a concept of an Eastern bloc anymore, it shouldn't be too much of a problem.Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:I won't be surprised if they decide to refit some of them to A5 standard.. in theory it is possible.
The German Bundeswehr Heer is currently undergoing considerable downsizing... -
The Russian army isn't a threat anymore.. much less really capable of fighting a war in the next decade or two.Originally posted by fallin:Of course they are. There aren't really any more significant threats to Germany anymore. Their traditional enemy France is now their best friend. Germany is one again and the Cold War's over. The only issue I can see is the rise of Russia again, but since there isn't really a concept of an Eastern bloc anymore, it shouldn't be too much of a problem.
Kinda funny, since the US and China are the only countries left that are maintaining sizable armies.
Which issue of Today Online was this mentioned? I can't find it on the Monday issue? Page no. if possible? -
i love the leo! shove some pic here please!
-
I think we will be getting more Leos in the future....maybe thats what our Defence Minister meant by spares....
-
Google or yahoo... Choose one.Originally posted by tankfanatic:i love the leo! shove some pic here please! -
We should fit our leopard 2 with our version of e metal storm like a CIWS for our tanks
-
Up there?Originally posted by tankfanatic:i love the leo! shove some pic here please! -
China is now the supreme force on land ... no other country on earth, not even the US, can compete on par with her ... most of it would be sheer numbers of course, but still ....Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:The Russian army isn't a threat anymore.. much less really capable of fighting a war in the next decade or two.
Kinda funny, since the US and China are the only countries left that are maintaining sizable armies.
Which issue of Today Online was this mentioned? I can't find it on the Monday issue? Page no. if possible?
on the other hand, no other country on earth can generate as much combat power at sea and on the air than the United States, period.
no prize for guessing where China's focus is on now ...
-
The MBTs are not meant to replace ALL our LT.Originally posted by Fatum:come now ... did anyone expect the SM1s to really keep soldiering on ? ... be honest
TCH always said it will replace "some" of the SM1. This could mean the SM1 soldier on until the next Light platform is in place.
Though very WW2 by today's standards with no stabiliser etc, the 75mm gun with STK developed ammo is still potent and can knock out from a distance everything the neighbours have except the MBTs. -
Well, the main problem with the 75mm gun is that the ammunition is obsolete, and the gun is limited to lightly armoured vehicles. These days, the minimum standard is a 105mm L7 rifled gun. Nothing less.Originally posted by chino65:The MBTs are not meant to replace ALL our LT.
TCH always said it will replace "some" of the SM1. This could mean the SM1 soldier on until the next Light platform is in place.
Though very WW2 by today's standards with no stabiliser etc, the 75mm gun with STK developed ammo is still potent and can knock out from a distance everything the neighbours have except the MBTs. -
Well, the problem would be, that the tanks that may be able to compete with the M1A1/A2 are few and I am not sure if their electronics are as good either.Originally posted by Fatum:China is now the supreme force on land ... no other country on earth, not even the US, can compete on par with her ... most of it would be sheer numbers of course, but still ....
on the other hand, no other country on earth can generate as much combat power at sea and on the air than the United States, period.
no prize for guessing where China's focus is on now ...
But if it boils down to numbers, then China has the advantage. But the fire control systems of the M1 Abrams are to be reckoned with. Not sure if the Russians also gave the latest in their 125mm ammunition and guns to the Chinese either.. thoguh the Chinese could work on that on their own but whether as good is another thing. -
China's strength is artillery .... they have absorbed the lessons and doctrine of the red army well ...Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:Well, the problem would be, that the tanks that may be able to compete with the M1A1/A2 are few and I am not sure if their electronics are as good either.
But if it boils down to numbers, then China has the advantage. But the fire control systems of the M1 Abrams are to be reckoned with. Not sure if the Russians also gave the latest in their 125mm ammunition and guns to the Chinese either.. thoguh the Chinese could work on that on their own but whether as good is another thing.
and I'd hesitate to discount their tanks ... their lazer research is top notch and picking up pace while the russians and the americans have slacken off after the cold war ... as to fire control systems and electronics, well ... counter measures is their strength, from lazer "dazzlers" to light weapons designed to blind electro-optics instruments and local EMP weapons ... they know their weaknesses, and know their adversaries' weak spots as well ... (recall the shooting down of one of their own weather satellite recently ? )
in the end, a war on land boils down to pretty a pure numerical equation, they are supreme on land ... that's why they feel comfortable enough to focus on "fighting a localized war in high-tech conditions" (read: an amphibous ops to retake taiwan, and subjugate the spratleys) ...
in anycase, for sure numbers alone, the PLA trumps any other land force in terms of hardware and warm bodies ... while uncle sam bleeds itself dry and guts her land forces in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
in 20 years I think if I'd like to visit the spratleys again to fish (fark, the fishing is out of this world there), I'd have to book my trip via a chinese company, instead of the current malaysian one ... -
Whereas that is true and China does have substantial artillery and artillery rockets, America's air power provides close combat support which China lacks. China also doesn't have combat support helicopters such as Apaches though I won't be surprised if they buy the Mi-28 from the Russians. Each US Army division, if I am not wrong, has a squadron of Apaches and I am not sure if the PLA has those as well. However, I think China is better off focusing on amphibious forces and also the PLN.Originally posted by Fatum:China's strength is artillery .... they have absorbed the lessons and doctrine of the red army well ...
and I'd hesitate to discount their tanks ... their lazer research is top notch and picking up pace while the russians and the americans have slacken off after the cold war ... as to fire control systems and electronics, well ... counter measures is their strength, from lazer "dazzlers" to light weapons designed to blind electro-optics instruments and local EMP weapons ... they know their weaknesses, and know their adversaries' weak spots as well ... (recall the shooting down of one of their own weather satellite recently ? )
in the end, a war on land boils down to pretty a pure numerical equation, they are supreme on land ... that's why they feel comfortable enough to focus on "fighting a localized war in high-tech conditions" (read: an amphibous ops to retake taiwan, and subjugate the spratleys) ...
in anycase, for sure numbers alone, the PLA trumps any other land force in terms of hardware and warm bodies ... while uncle sam bleeds itself dry and guts her land forces in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
in 20 years I think if I'd like to visit the spratleys again to fish (fark, the fishing is out of this world there), I'd have to book my trip via a chinese company, instead of the current malaysian one ...
Regardless, the US Army, with enough money and time, can rejuvenate itself. I don't see the US Army in Iraq very soon either after the next US Presidential elections. Personally, I don't see a conflict coming for the next decade or so. China has a lot of catching up if it intends to challenge the might of the US Pacific Fleet. -
The problem with China is that you don't know which of their abilites are real and which are on paper only.
For example, if their press on their R&D is to be believed, China would somehow have the most advanced just about everything in the world today, and somehow I find those claims dubious, kinda like the super Pakistani penetrators.
Thing is, no accountability. Their customers aren't as stringent as the West anyway and they can get away by claiming fantastic abilities to their clients, who want to believe what they are hearing.
So will their stuff work or end up like the much hyped GPS jammers the Iraqis deployed (that got destroyed by GPS bombs) is something we can't know until the shooting starts.
But one thing I am reasonably sure of is that China makes cheap clones of much more expensive stuff at reasonable quality. -
China got pwnzed (sort of) by the viets during their 1979 border war ... basically because of non-existent air-support, rest assured that they have absorbed the lesson well .... they are developing their own attack choppers I believe, and with swarms of multi-role flankers, I'd hardly discount their air support .... throwing a few full regiments of flankers at a US carrier battle group at once should be sufficient to overwhelm it ....Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:Whereas that is true and China does have substantial artillery and artillery rockets, America's air power provides close combat support which China lacks. China also doesn't have combat support helicopters such as Apaches though I won't be surprised if they buy the Mi-28 from the Russians. Each US Army division, if I am not wrong, has a squadron of Apaches and I am not sure if the PLA has those as well. However, I think China is better off focusing on amphibious forces and also the PLN.
Regardless, the US Army, with enough money and time, can rejuvenate itself. I don't see the US Army in Iraq very soon either after the next US Presidential elections. Personally, I don't see a conflict coming for the next decade or so. China has a lot of catching up if it intends to challenge the might of the US Pacific Fleet. .... or how about firing multiple salvos of silkworm with local EMP weapons ? .... okay, so ship defences take out 99% of the missiles, but it's enough that one gets through .... no american dies, the fleet limps back to pearl harbour with no casualties, no mangled bodies and outraged american public on CNN, finito, the war in the taiwan straits is over ... and don't forget the subs too ....
and to counter american air-support ? ... like I said ... China's strength is in their artillery ... that includes ADA .... they pioneered super cheapo, one tube throw away manpads ... cheap enough that everyone in a regiment of troops can have one, the way we'd get our matadors during war time ... so what if the pK of those cheap knock offs may be only 11 or 12 %, everyone in a platoon fires off a tube, and there won't be much apaches left in the sky after the salvo ...
The US army's military might, supreme as they are right now, are only good enough to take on second rate banana republics, and little despots around the world ... taking on another major nation is quite another thing altogether ... -
JDAMS do HAVE inertial guidance back-ups ..... and I thought the "dazzlers" the Iraqis used were primitive 1st gen russian stuff ? ...Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:The problem with China is that you don't know which of their abilites are real and which are on paper only.
For example, if their press on their R&D is to be believed, China would somehow have the most advanced just about everything in the world today, and somehow I find those claims dubious, kinda like the super Pakistani penetrators.
Thing is, no accountability. Their customers aren't as stringent as the West anyway and they can get away by claiming fantastic abilities to their clients, who want to believe what they are hearing.
So will their stuff work or end up like the much hyped GPS jammers the Iraqis deployed (that got destroyed by GPS bombs) is something we can't know until the shooting starts.
But one thing I am reasonably sure of is that China makes cheap clones of much more expensive stuff at reasonable quality.
true, they like to toot their own horns (who doesn't ... ) ... but let's not forget that we're talking about a nation that's been launching satellites, exploded their own atomic bombs, and became the third country to launch someone into space (even if it's on something copied from the russians) ... I know, we laugh at their cheapo knock-offs of GM cars, and curse at their poisonous food exports ... but discount them at your own peril ... like I said, I think 15-20 years from now, we'd be able to visit the spratley islands to fish ... but via a chinese company .... (which, by the way, is already a reality ... one of my PRC friends told me he got his diving license there ... staging out of hainan ... ) -
Well, one must remember, that bombers like the B-1B, are designed for high altitude strikes out of range of most anti-air weapons. Plus, the B-2s are stealthy for the purpose of deep penetration strikes.Originally posted by Fatum:China got pwnzed (sort of) by the viets during their 1979 border war ... basically because of non-existent air-support, rest assured that they have absorbed the lesson well .... they are developing their own attack choppers I believe, and with swarms of multi-role flankers, I'd hardly discount their air support .... throwing a few full regiments of flankers at a US carrier battle group at once should be sufficient to overwhelm it .... .... or how about firing multiple salvos of silkworm with local EMP weapons ? .... okay, so ship defences take out 99% of the missiles, but it's enough that one gets through .... no american dies, the fleet limps back to pearl harbour with no casualties, no mangled bodies and outraged american public on CNN, finito, the war in the taiwan straits is over ... and don't forget the subs too ....
and to counter american air-support ? ... like I said ... China's strength is in their artillery ... that includes ADA .... they pioneered super cheapo, one tube throw away manpads ... cheap enough that everyone in a regiment of troops can have one, the way we'd get our matadors during war time ... so what if the pK of those cheap knock offs may be only 11 or 12 %, everyone in a platoon fires off a tube, and there won't be much apaches left in the sky after the salvo ...
The US army's military might, supreme as they are right now, are only good enough to take on second rate banana republics, and little despots around the world ... taking on another major nation is quite another thing altogether ...
And remember, the US military also possesses EMP weapons... if the Chinese use it, the US is bound to... Let's not discount the fact that the Tomahawks are a proven platform with much greater range than the Silkworms. The US Navy will have to be within view of the Chinese shore for the Silkworms to be used.
And attack Helicopters are used together with the army... they don't go around alone.... I would like to see the infantry deal with the AFVs while they try to shoot.
Do note that the US Army and Navy trained to deal with the swarm tactics of the Red Army... And that the US still has plenty of nukes if it comes to it. -
high-altitude bombers also make fat juicy targets for flankers ...Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:Well, one must remember, that bombers like the B-1B, are designed for high altitude strikes out of range of most anti-air weapons. Plus, the B-2s are stealthy for the purpose of deep penetration strikes.
And remember, the US military also possesses EMP weapons... if the Chinese use it, the US is bound to... Let's not discount the fact that the Tomahawks are a proven platform with much greater range than the Silkworms. The US Navy will have to be within view of the Chinese shore for the Silkworms to be used.
And attack Helicopters are used together with the army... they don't go around alone.... I would like to see the infantry deal with the AFVs while they try to shoot.
Do note that the US Army and Navy trained to deal with the swarm tactics of the Red Army... And that the US still has plenty of nukes if it comes to it. ... methinks the US will never achieve air-superiority in an east asian theatre the way they did over iraq or even the balkans ....
and then again, in the end, it's still an equation of resolve and means ... let's say both sides uses EMP weapons, two US carrier battle groups get taken out .... the war is over for the US ... but what equivalent targets does the US EMP weapons have ? ... the chinese can still cross over the straits in a mass of small boats and still swarm over taiwan ....
and attack choppers ? ... remember the incident in Iraq, earlier on in the war, when a whole battalion of apaches had to turn back because of concentrated ground small arms fire ? ... (with one shot down, and a number of others taken out of future missions ? ) .... a helicopter is just that ... however heavily armoured the bodies, put a shell burst near enough to rotors and what not, it'll go down ...
and what about national resolve then ? ... let's say it's taiwan or the spratleys ... both places are thought of as "home soil" by any chinese ... flip out a navigation chart from any chinese-flagged ship and you'll see most of the south china sea marked at EEZ and territorial waters ... couple that with the kind of rabid nationalism we see in our dear forumers like dreamryb, hellomoto ... and the sort who'll riot and tear up sushi resturants ? ...
what about US resolve then ? ... arrange a few mangled bodies shots on cable television and you'll have plenty more cindy sheehans camping outside camp david ...