Oz Abrams cant go to war
-
Without ''blue force tracker'' installed on board,Aussie M1A1
Abrams tanks would be killed by friendly fires!!
Sorry to tell you that there is NO such ''blue force tracker''
installed.Tomorrow ,if these Abrams tanks go to
battle fields,even in Aussie own soil,some of them
would be hit by friendly forces!!
Can u tell me it is acceptable for this kind of
delay happen?
You can read from Audit report that the tender of rail transport
has just been called for!!
Pl prepare 2 hours to read.
1.Failure to communicate,an McPhedran,July 26, 2007 ---www.news.com.au/heraldsun/THE army's $555 million fleet of 59 front-line main battle tanks could not safely go to war alongside US forces because of a potentially deadly communications gap.
2.T h e A u d i t o r - G e n e r a l
An audit of the M1A1 Abrams tank project has found the tanks' $12 million battle management system has not been installed.
That means the American-built machines could not be tracked on the battlefield by allied forces.
In a war, that would place them at dire risk of being hit by so-called "friendly fire".
During the Iraq war a number of British vehicles were bombed by US aircraft and in Afghanistan, Canadian armoured vehicles have been hit by US missiles with fatal consequences.
Australian special forces vehicles deployed with US and British forces in Iraq and Afghanistan carry a satellite tracking system known as a "blue force tracker". ...
According to the officer charged with buying and equipping the tanks, Brigadier Mike Phelps from the Defence Materiel Organisation, defence has been unable to negotiate a suitable agreement for a satellite link with any Australian company.
"We aim to have it in by the end of the year," Brig. Phelps said.
According to a report from the Australian National Audit Office, a temporary system should have been in place by this month.
That has not happened and tank crews are unable to train with a viable battle management system......
Audit Report No.1 2007–08
Performance Audit---Acquisition of the ABRAMS Main Battle Tank----www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2007-08_Audit_Report_1.pdf
3.u can say i am anti --oz.But how about the oz Audit General? -
This counts as trolling, rite?
-
Correct.Originally posted by fudgester:This counts as trolling, rite?
I can't even be bothered with his post, but let's adress a more fundemental problem with our own forces:Originally posted by noisylionPls take 10 hours to read
Sg SAR21 Infantry cant go to war
Have I not say there is a problem with SAF armed force?
SAR-21, infantry section cannot fight as united force before SAR-21 dunt share mags with the M203 and Ultimax 100.
Dis means that if SAR-21 soldier run out of a bullet, the soldier cannot share ammo like a normal infanty section. This is a somethng that seem very bad.
Even thou solution has been made 2 make a SAR-21 share M-16 mag, its dunt issue out to the SAF soldier that needs it but to export market? This mean they dunt put the SAF soldier first.
After spending much of your hard earn money to develop SAR-21, still dunt implement suich a simple thing!
Is the acceptable?
This is mean war will your son say to you "daddy mommy i go war we all keep dying because we cannot share ammo... and den when we try to surrender our english so poor enemy cannot understand and many of us got shot dead!"
Is this acceptable? -
Originally posted by noisylion:
Without being present ready in battlefield, Sg Leopard2 tanks would be totally useless!!
Sorry to tell you that there is NO such "leopard 2" tank here yet
installed.Tomorrow ,if these SAF go to war,even in Sg own soil, the 3G SAF of them
would be going in leaky old AMX-13 tank while all enemies have MODERN TANKS!!
Can u tell me it is acceptable for this kind of
thing happen?
Pl prepare 2 hours to read.
Sg modern tank still not ready and going "familairzing trail", meaning sg 3G soldier have still fight in a tank no match for enemy forces
"The main battle tank is undergoing "local familiarisation trials," the defence ministry told The Straits Times. "
Even now not enough tank to replace old leaky AMX 13, your son or daughter might still fight in that old tank that you think seem not bad, but no match for anything.
3.[b]u can say i am anti --sg.But how about the sg Buy tank plansl?
[/b] -
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
2.some times,u have to improve by learning from other peoples'
Correct.
I can't even be bothered with his post, but let's adress a more fundemental problem with our own forces:
lessons,free lessons!!
Thats why we have to be busy body with other countries.
But i am sorry again to tell u bad news fr Oz.
3.I wont agrue with u if u think this is peanut. -
lionnoisy cant go to war
Originally posted by noisylion:
Without ''good english standard" installed on board lionnoisy brain, lionnoisy
would be killed by friendly fires!!
Sorry to tell you that there is NO such "good english standard"
installed.Tomorrow ,if these lionnoisy go to
battle fields,even in Siggie own soil,some of lionnoisy
would be hit by friendly forces!!
becos lionnoisy cannot commuinicate properly, how can he pass information
or listen to order that seem not bad?
despite years of your hard earn money spend on english
edu, still got a lionnoisy standard
Can u tell me it is acceptable for this kind of
think happen?
You can read from Audit report on english stanard in siggie dropping!
Pl prepare 2 hours to read, if you can read at all.
1.[b]bad english everywhere, MOE force to use Aussie
teacher to teach Siggie english!
3.u can say i am anti --oz.But how about the lionnoisy english that is useless to protect Siggie in times of war?
Du you want to sent your sons and daughter to
war with a lionnoisy who can't understand and pass
info n orders?
is dis not a bigger failure to communicate then Ozzie?
[/b] -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:2.some times,u have to improve by learning from other peoples'
lessons,free lessons!!
Thats why we have to be busy body with other countries.
But i am sorry again to tell u bad news fr Oz.
3.I wont agrue with u if u think this is peanut.
I'm afriad you are just going to get pwned again. I am going to answer your points in full, and beyond what you can respond to yet again.
I believe the question is, why you don't seem to learn from your own lessons on not being able to get your facts right before posting. What exactly is so unique about the Australian situtation?
Do you want to hear about our own as well? Heard of stuff like the SAR 80 and SAR 88 that was delayed and delayed and delayed? Bx LT variant? Light Strike getting stuck on mounds it should have cleared easily during demostrations infront of VIPs? .50 cal chamber explosion? Delays in getting the much needed SLWAGL to the troops? SAR in common useage being unable to share mags? The stupid idea of running the finest LMG in the world on 30-round mags that is still carried out today? Bx and M113 overturning?
LOL, I think a kanganoisy in some ozForums would have a lot more to post on us. We would improve much better if we learn from our own mistakes first, and there are plenty.
LOL, this is indeed a peanut, and worse there is nothing to argue about. The Aussies noted a problem, and are on their way to fixing it. You have lost your own thread from the very first post, as usual.
And what free lessons do we have to learn from the aussies?
Do you think our Leopards are ready to fight right now? You would be seriously deluded. The difference is that we don't have a media to put a negative spin on each and every delay.
But when you served in the NS, you know that there are plenty of foul ups and delays.
Do you seriously need me to shame you once again by stating the list of things the SAF have done wrong in getting our equipment to work? Do you want to be pwned like in the missing rifles thread which you have quietly slipped out of and not responded?
So what's your point of posting bad news from Oz? Except that to bring up the fact that the SAF is not any better or even worse!
Sigh, why do you get pwned so easily again?
Here's a tip, try reading more on ALL things military, not just what's wrong with the ADF. -
isn't the topic supposed to be about the Australian Army's M1 ?? Why are we talking bout the foul ups in the SAF....it would be better to start a topic on that rite?
-
You must try to understand... with lionnoisy special rules apply to all the threads he attempts to start. Allowed to go unchecked, his threads will degenerate into mindless Aussie bashing, which is not welcome here at all.Originally posted by mozzi190:isn't the topic supposed to be about the Australian Army's M1 ?? Why are we talking bout the foul ups in the SAF....it would be better to start a topic on that rite?
Also, it's a lot more fun to see how badly pwned lionnoisy can get when he attempts to feebly justify his "opinions". -
Oh well..to be honest...australians are quite a light hearted bunch of people..it the bashing isn't too serious..they would take it with a pinch of salt and laugh if of..or probably agree with the bashing..hehe
-
Who has the capability to land armoured vehicles that require abrams to shoot?
If the aussies send the abrams to coalition forces. US will install those for them. -
Actually they'll just call lionnoisy a git and get on with sharing a cold one.Originally posted by mozzi190:Oh well..to be honest...australians are quite a light hearted bunch of people..it the bashing isn't too serious..they would take it with a pinch of salt and laugh if of..or probably agree with the bashing..hehe
But on the other hand, lionnoisy is making us Singaporeans look really bad, and hence the need to terminate his threads with extreme prejudice like Massai warriors hunting lions that have gotten too annoying. -
For some reason lionnoisy thinks that all other armed forces outside of the SAF have intelligences roughly equal to that of the bots in Battlefield. The most popular the nation is as a destination for migration, the dumber they must be.Originally posted by CM06:Who has the capability to land armoured vehicles that require abrams to shoot?
If the aussies send the abrams to coalition forces. US will install those for them.
Unfortunately it turns out he is the only bot here doing the same thing over and over again and getting fragged each time for all his efforts. -
when did oz decide to buy the tank?
They have few years to prepare the required Battle Management Sys
and spec for the tenders.
But what happen now?
It is lucky if ''the provision of satellite services which is expected to be established by the end of 2007''!
Do u believe that in the damn hot of war,
''standing rules of engagement require all coalition forces to positively identify a target before engaging. ....'' by voices radios can be assured no friendly fires!!
How can a pilot flying a few hundred km per hour and few thousand feet
above to ''positively identify a target before engaging''?
If he is Superman then he can.
Let me present ADF explanation here.
26 July 2007 — The Editor, Herald Sun26 July 2007 — The Editor, Herald Sun
Dear Sir,
Your article (‘Failure to communicate’, Thursday 26 July, p15) unfairly criticises Australia's Abrams main battle tank.
Australian Abrams tanks can operate safely with and communicate effectively with US and other coalition forces.
The vehicle is fitted with two voice radios that are capable of communicating with any coalition radio operating in the same mode and on the same wavelength.
Whilst the Battle Management System provides increased situational awareness for commanders, standing rules of engagement require all coalition forces to positively identify a target before engaging. Therefore vehicles not fitted with Blue Force Tracker will not be at “grave risk of being destroyed by other fighting vehicles or coalition aircraft” as suggested by your article.
The Battle Management System requires either satellite, combined with a data fusion centre, or radio based (terrestrial) carrier signals to enable a network to be established.
Defence is negotiating the provision of satellite services which is expected to be established by the end of 2007. In the meantime an interim solution is being investigated.
It is disappointing that reporting on such important matters glosses over the actual facts and details.
Brigadier Mike Phelps
Department of Defence
-
By your logic, SAF's going to be 85% fracticide dead lionnoisy.
having just returned from my ICT, it's prettty obvious you have zero clue how such stuff are planned...Friendly fire from air strikes will happen if the planning beforehand + orders arent follow + improper CAS requests gets approved.
Pretty sure if we can do it, so can the Aussies since they are much better equipped and experience than us. Frankly, when they say Eyeball a target, i always thought it's eyeballing them from a camera in a targetting pod.
Having a target coordinator on the ground would be the best way to avoid friendly bombings. Alternatively, a good UAV. -
Thread closed*