SG New IFV & air defense upgrades.Cheers!
-
Unlike amoured units, wheeled IFVs may not be organic to the unit. This was discussed years ago.
-
we shall enjoy the air and walk...lolOriginally posted by gd4u:300 looks ok to equip the 6 Bns, but wat abt the NS Bns
sian..
hahaha
but just imagine...
how much durians u can put into an IFV..lol -
Actually 300 vehicles is barely enough to equip a brigade but considering it's difference from actual armoured ops i suppose it's sufficient for 3 Bns. Myabe its still under a trial and stuff so future might more be like 1 active and 2 NS bns to for a brigade.
-
Considering its not operating alone and will probably compliment existing Bionix, Bionix 2 and M113s, I guess 300 should suffice. Also, I believe there are also some ancient V-150s still in service (V200 are with ADA equipped with RBS-70 I think).Originally posted by CM06:Actually 300 vehicles is barely enough to equip a brigade but considering it's difference from actual armoured ops i suppose it's sufficient for 3 Bns. Myabe its still under a trial and stuff so future might more be like 1 active and 2 NS bns to for a brigade. -
will the terrex change the ops profile of the infantry ?
i doubt it can complement the armor, wheels have limited off-road cap. -
Yeah but each vehicle type has to have their own orbat and units.Originally posted by sgf:Considering its not operating alone and will probably compliment existing Bionix, Bionix 2 and M113s, I guess 300 should suffice. Also, I believe there are also some ancient V-150s still in service (V200 are with ADA equipped with RBS-70 I think).
It's unlikely you will have wheeled IFVs coming to 2.5 bns, 2.25 coy, 0.8 brigade. Usually it will be a complete Unit regardless of size.
What i meant was 300 vehicles has to quantitfy into whole unit numbers (Dont forget unit numbers will come with the support vehicles (engineer/medic/firesupport because they have to move together or even replacement vehicles), it will go beyond 1 vehicle to account for each section as the unit grows bigger.
Hence why i count as 1 brigade. 300 vehicles should be able to cover 1 NS brigade strength + vehicles for training 1 bn + spares which is very good i feel.
I just cannot figure out how the L2s are going to be sorted wait until i can go look see look see when i go reservice again.
As for the question if Wheeled IFVs can complement armoured ops, they can and will do very well. Armour can always punch a hole through then let the wheel units flood through the gap to rend lines in the defense. Let the heavier units take the beating and pounding but wheel IFVs will be superior in navigating urban areas with more stealth. -
i dun understand, wheel veh will sink in the mud and got trapped.Originally posted by CM06:As for the question if Wheeled IFVs can complement armoured ops, they can and will do very well. Armour can always punch a hole through then let the wheel units flood through the gap to rend lines in the defense. Let the heavier units take the beating and pounding but wheel IFVs will be superior in navigating urban areas with more stealth.
Tracks are good on off-road terrain, but wheels ???
Terrex is going to have a hard time navigating in urban area, large turning radius and cant pivot steer. Stealth ? no, Terrex looks tall and large. -
Wheels will sink in very soft mud. But armour ops wont usually go where it's also detrimental to their own advantages. Firepower, protection and mobility even for the terrax it will have those features and thus can complement armour ops.
The Terrax might be big and tall but it runs on wheels. It will be much quieter to move about than tracks in urban areas. -
still cannot see how wheels complement the tracks in off-road terrain.
wheels are not suitable in off-road terrains where most armor ops will be conducted.
Similarly, i did not see the Strykers complementing the Abrams, Bradleys and M113s during ops.
wheels although quieter does not equal to ease in navigating in urban area.
wheeled IFV however could provide protection during transportation to hot zones at a faster response time given a on-road situation -
Captured Iraqis said they were caught off guard when Strykers appeared before them. Speaks quite a bit of its "stealth". Wheels are definitely a whole lot faster & quieter than tracks.
-
Wheel/Track arguments can discuss until the cows come home and it's still never concluded.
Wheels arent that badly hampered as you think, but they arent fantastically are mobile. Just to clarify, where the rover can go, a wheel ifv can go. A track can go where a wheel cannot go BUT there are also many places where the track cannot go. Terrax can go upslope 60 degrees that's comparable performance to tracks. 0.7m verticle and 2 metre gap, that's very impressive. I'm surprise myself when i saw the brochure hehe.
In armour ops, you wont pick a lousy terrain to fight unless you have to. If you have to, then you are in trouble eitherway if you are track or not (or you send in the infantry to walk hehe). While wheel ifvs have not been used to complement track vehicles so far, they can and are able to do so over decent terrain which are often picked for use in armour movements. Wheels will have no problem on plantations definitely.
Iraq's is sand. Here we have mud. Which is worst? Cant honestly say without sitting on the terrex to confirm.
As for urban ops, you dont drive your vehicle into a place where you cant move freely, whether track or not. yes while tracks can pivot turn, urban areas have plenty of roads that are catered for lorries and buses which are far bigger than wheeled ifvs. Not to mention, unlike cars, wheeled ifvs arent restricted by the curb. If something is in the way, they just have to go over it.
What i meant was the tactical ability for the vehicles to be approach closer without being detected. Especially in the environment at night and there's still fighting. Tracks on road can be heard distinctly. -
Wheeled IFVs are also good for secondary force insertions ( in the context of invasion hierarchy) in the night to mop up resistance.
-
U guys have good analysis on wheeled and tracked IFVs
mobility between wheeled and tracked vehicles are comparable
however i am just concerned abt the large ground pressure exerted by the wheeled vehicles.
Wheeled vehicles need less maintainence and support and thus consumed less resources.
Wheeled vehicles travel faster and thus a suitable candidate for rapid deployment.
Wheeled vehicles will appear "less threatening" than tracked vehicles thus more suitable for roles in peace keeping
since the infantry are getting the terrex
how will this change the mission profile of the infantry ? -
Wheeled vehicles travel faster... on roads or other firm surfaces. Cross country, it all depends. Tracks will travel well regardless.Originally posted by I_love_my_toilet:U guys have good analysis on wheeled and tracked IFVs
mobility between wheeled and tracked vehicles are comparable
however i am just concerned abt the large ground pressure exerted by the wheeled vehicles.
Wheeled vehicles need less maintainence and support and thus consumed less resources.
Wheeled vehicles travel faster and thus a suitable candidate for rapid deployment.
Wheeled vehicles will appear "less threatening" than tracked vehicles thus more suitable for roles in peace keeping
since the infantry are getting the terrex
how will this change the mission profile of the infantry ?
For Wheeled vehicles to follow behind a large force of tracks... may not be a very good idea. The tracks tend to tear up and damage the path, making it even harder for wheeled vehicles to navigate.
How will the Terrex change the mission profile of the infantry? They might be able to travel further on the vehicle and hump it a whole lot less. The Terrex affords more protection than the Tonners can, and would be able to bring the men to the front without getting ambushed by partisan forces with just small arms. -
Japanese armour attacked using roads down the Malaya peninsula during WW2.
We already have more than enough tracked vehicles. Time to get more wheels that can zip along on roads at high speeds. -
I think the mechanisation of INF BN into a wheeled based mechanised IFV force like the stryker combat teams are a gd initiative.
The ammo tradition INF carry is limited and we do carry lesser ammos than the western military.This is bcos their troops are mechanised so they can ferry more eqp, ammos and rations. This will lead to lesser strain and burden to the troops as they are no longer travelling on foot.
Secondly, traditional foot soldiers are easy prey for enemy arty fire even in the vegetations. So for the IFV unless the ammo is some sort of anti armour flechettes, the chances of survival and lower casualty rates are high. Besides, if the IFV is carrying some sort of thermal imager and that the BMS is linked to UAVs, danger areas can be discovered earlier and thus be avoided.
Thirdly, the firepower is going to increase, as the chain cannon or the grenade laucher on it can provide additional fire support as compared to the traditional 84RR and MG -
1.wheel get centralised remote control tyre pressures to adjustOriginally posted by I_love_my_toilet:i dun understand, wheel veh will sink in the mud and got trapped.
Tracks are good on off-road terrain, but wheels ???
Terrex is going to have a hard time navigating in urban area, large turning radius and cant pivot steer. Stealth ? no, Terrex looks tall and large.
tyre pressre for various ground softness.
Read the spec lah.. -
I think the key word is rapid deployment. The Yanks were said to be very impressed with our Bionix but chose Stryker over it 'cos Stryker was wheeled. Bionix comes in a variant that can be transported by C-130 but AFAIK SAF doesn't use those. Our's can't fit into C-130. But the Terrex can. Its amphibious capability will come in useful too.
If Wikipedia is to be believed, Terrex is to replace V200. And AFAIK V200 is used by ADA units only as a platform for RBS-70. The wheeled vehicles used by Armour are the even older V150.
Nevertheless, would be interesting seeing a Terrex mounted with a 105mm tank gun or multiple ATGM launchers. After all, a previous COA did toy with the idea of a missile platform to replace the SM1s. With Leo 2 coming into the picture, maybe such a platform could complement the Leo 2. Speaking of ATGM, any idea why none of our IFVs have ATGM? I believe the Stryker and Bradley are equiped with ATGMs in addition to their 20 (or was it 30?) mm gun.
-
The fact they cater the CTIS, Central Tyre Inflation System means Terrex really have problem with ground pressure and really need some adjustment.
How well the adjustment, we do not know either.
The more useful function for CTIS is to inflate the punctured tyres so that the vehicle still can move but in a degraded mode.
Terrex certainly will be a force multipler is most of the forumer's opinion here i suppose.
Discuss about the possible disadvantage of having Terrex ?
Will there be safety issues ? Heavy Machinery here...
Dun forget, SAF armor TSR is "traded" with blood of our soldiers...
-
I saw a Terrex on a low loader today along AYE around 3.15 ...
I was pretty surprised that it wasn't covered in canvas. It does look big, and it was all flat at the top, without any weapon holder or anything.
The Terrex TSR should be closely modelled after the 'armour TSR' ba. I doubt there is much safety issues abound (perhaps, untill we try it ourselves). But I guess the safety emphasis will be done by ST, DSTA first ba ... -
I think only stuff not revealed to the public is not covered by canvas ba...
1st sign of Terrex ^^
-
Bradley/Strykers are armed with 30/25 mm.
Terrex -may- replace the v200s if the terrax gets approved and accepted in the SAF as a multipurpose wheel IFV.
At only 10 tons worth of load, i'm not so sure if a 105 mm low-velo barrel is suitable when packaged with a good FCS.
30mm/GPMG/AGL/0.5 RWS is definitely possible and IS shown as a package on the stengg pdf brochure.
There's no need for us to have ATGMs complement our Bx 2s 30mm at the moment.
There's a reason why you mentioned the "previous" COA Where is he now? Missile tanks are a headache - nice to have but useless.
There are alot of drawbacks to missiles to be used as the main engagement armnament in armoured combat.
high cost, high maintainence, huge weight, large size, electricity, limited tactical flexibility, lack of economical value, continuous tech-edge dependence are the main drawbacks to going pure missile in addition to numerous other reasons.
-
The fact they cater the CTIS, Central Tyre Inflation System means Terrex really have problem with ground pressure and really need some adjustment.
How well the adjustment, we do not know either.
I don't really think so, I mean it's a useful feature to have and by any measures its pretty commonplace even in normal trucks... in the end you are not going to use the same tire pressure for driving offroad then if you are moving down a smooth highway.
-
we have cits on all our new MAN 5 - tonners. It's a feature not a patch
-
There is really a limit how good CTIS will go and it does not auto adjust to the terrain.
By softening the tyre results in a greater surface area of contact where the same force spread over a larger area reduces the ground pressure.
Terrex weighs tens of tons... 8 contact areas...
Ground Clearance oso affected...
Still v prone to sinking leh
