SG New IFV & air defense upgrades.Cheers!
-
This topic of wheeled APC/IFVs has come up every year. For infantry type units (Infantry/Guards) the wheeled IFV presents itself as another option (in simplistic terms).
In direct attack/counter attack missions, infantry units can now ride in the vehicle in order to get as close as possible to the objective, while under fire. The vehicle can protect troops against small arms fire/ artillery fragments, and provides additional covering fire as a firebase (a mobile firebase).
Now compare that to just walking - troops will sustain more casualties or will be more tired (remember the shouts of Arti! Arti!?). Transport with 5 tonners will only get troops so far – you still get out and take a long, long walk to the FUP. With helicopters, it’s even worse. I have never been on an exercise where we land directly on the objective (forget those old Vietnam war movies). The LZ/LP is far away from the objective to remain tactical.
Then you have your movement to contact missions. Why run and chase the bad guys when you can have vehicle support. The vehicle will have its own automatic canon/AGL/MGs. I have been on live firing exercises with the V200s.
For defense and block missions – anyone, especially the MG/84mm teams will tell you, withdrawal and block missions are tough. Withdraw and block for 10km in the mid day sun will knock you out (I’ve seen it), nevermind the enemy chasing you. Worse if they have vehicles and you don’t. Now there’s option to ride in a protected vehicle. You don’t have to argue with umpires declaring you dead because the opposition shot through your 3/5 tonner.
Other missions – area patrols/protection, rapid deployment, logistics escort (you don’t want your combat train ambushed). All of the above were done by V200s, and should be replaced by newer vehicles.
Wheeled APC/IFVs should not be compared to their heavier tracked cousins. They are another option, used when the mission requires it – just like helicopters, fast crafts/boats, and the humble 3/5 tonners. We have people from infantry and armour. But it seems very few here have been train to use wheeled light armour. Though lighter in armour, they are still very quiet compared to tracked vehicles. Anyone who has been on a armoured battalion exercise will know – when an armoured battalion moves, the whole world knows.
Using the wheeled APC/IFCs is no secret – we had those (V200s) for infantry units before the M113 (that’s over 30 years ago). What is being done is to refresh and update the tactics for units. Considering all the modern extra equipment infantry units have these days (BMS, etc) – best to have a newer vehicle. And no, the new vehicle is not particular for urban ops use.
Most modern armed forces have light, medium and heavy units. And so shall we. Malaysia uses light armoured vehicles in the same way described, in conjunction with the strategic North/South highway. While Indonesia has a dedicated infantry unit with organic V150/VAB support for rapid deployment into trouble spots (the V150 came after the V200s).
-
I've got a question, can our Terrex be air-droppable or airmobile? If so, perhaps there can be a formation of a light armoured brigade, that is rapidly deployable and in size. Wheels will be good and useful in this sense as they will be lighter than tracked vehicles. Thus Light Armour can be deployed further up the line to "chope" the area before the Heavy Armour and other follow-ups come and hook-up with them.
Frankly since we've got SPIKES, why not mount them on the Terrex, since it may not be suitable for it to be mounted with a 105mm gun? It will be great to have a Terrex based light armoured brigade with 30mm guns and SPIKE combo, CIS40/50, Remote Operated 50s, and for air defense, mount them with IGLAs since the M113s would not be able to keep up with the wheeled Terrexes.
On a suitable replacement for the Rapier, the British Starstreak looks pretty enticing given that its 3 sub-munitions greatly improve the chance of a kill.
-
Good post by bcoy.
To add on, the purpose to mechanise the infantry is part of our 3G army revolution.
And I quote:
[Quote]
COA, MG Neo Kian Hong said that army of the future will be developed into a force with [B]Precision Fires , Precision Maneouvre and Precise Information.[/B][/Quote]
Having the 8x8 IFV not only improve the mobility of our infantry units to make full use of the Precise Information in NCW army but also becos of the network connectivity of the equipment that our future infantry will be carrying, those batteries which only last hrs need to be charged up from time to time.
So they will be charged via the charger by using the power from the powerplant of the IFV.
-
This new format is f**king slow and does not seem to accept BB coding!!!
Anyway, ST Engg has reported that Terrex could mount a 105mm and perhaps even 155mm howitzer but more like sales pitch than actual testing with prototype.
As for Spike, Turkey version of our Terrex was exhibited with Rafael 30mm RWS with has a 30mm cannon and a twin Spike launcher.
Will try to post the pix when the new format sort out all it's bugs.
-
All along we are talking about Terrex's advantages...
How abt the possible shortfalls ?
Such as lack of protection to RPGs ? Need to install slat armors like the Strykers ?
MG Neo merely re-emphasize the concepts of the Future Combat System nia... nothing new actually.
How far are we from the future ?
US Army is not near yet...
And i cant wait to see the revolution...
-
How easy would it be to mount Spikes on our IFVs if needed? Anyway back to topic, I think the fact that its C130 transportable and amphibious makes Terrex a good addition.
-
How easy to mount spikes will depend on the turret that is on the ifv. If the ifv turret in question is spike capable IE it's FCS is able to use control and command spike then no problem.
Short fall for all armour
If a war head penetrates, boom you have alot of casualties.
No fuel. No armour.
Do you need add on armour? DUH. Slat is the basic. ERA, additional ceramic, steel blocks blah blah blah.
If you want to abandon your vehicle, you better destroy everything in the vehicle and the vehicle itself and carry all classified items with you. IE, if it gets stuck in a ditch and help is far away, either sit tight and camp or ask for permission to blow it up and walk.
ST Engg is bragging unless they have a steroid terrax. I dont see how 105mm plus modern FCS and ammo is NOT going to exceed 10 tons(supposed combat load of terrax). Dont even mention 155mm. 400CC diesel only leh....even the BX has 500cc if i remember correctly. The BX is 22 tons FFs and even THAT cannot support the SM1 turret.
-
ST Engg is bragging unless they have a steroid terrax. I dont see how 105mm plus modern FCS and ammo is NOT going to exceed 10 tons(supposed combat load of terrax). Dont even mention 155mm. 400CC diesel only leh....even the BX has 500cc if i remember correctly. The BX is 22 tons FFs and even THAT cannot support the SM1 turret.
If I recall, the BX is actually heavier and more powerful then the SM1.
But as to if the Terrax cannot support a 105mm gun, I am not entirely sure... if they can have the MGS mount a 105mm why not for the Terrax?
-
Originally posted by CM06:
How easy to mount spikes will depend on the turret that is on the ifv. If the ifv turret in question is spike capable IE it's FCS is able to use control and command spike then no problem.
Short fall for all armour
If a war head penetrates, boom you have alot of casualties.
No fuel. No armour.
Do you need add on armour? DUH. Slat is the basic. ERA, additional ceramic, steel blocks blah blah blah.
If you want to abandon your vehicle, you better destroy everything in the vehicle and the vehicle itself and carry all classified items with you. IE, if it gets stuck in a ditch and help is far away, either sit tight and camp or ask for permission to blow it up and walk.
ST Engg is bragging unless they have a steroid terrax. I dont see how 105mm plus modern FCS and ammo is NOT going to exceed 10 tons(supposed combat load of terrax). Dont even mention 155mm. 400CC diesel only leh....even the BX has 500cc if i remember correctly. The BX is 22 tons FFs and even THAT cannot support the SM1 turret.
Actually it could handle max 10 tons payload, not 10 tons max combat weight, so dun mix it up.
Actually the full combat weight of vanilla APC version of Terrex is abt 17.5 tonnes.
( this is for C-130 transportability)
But in reality the Terrex platform could handle up to max weight of 24 tonnes.
(Based on Janes reports in 2001, but Wiki stated now it could go as far as 25~30tons?)
Which is more than enough to handle low recoil 105mm tank gun.
As for 155 SPH, look no further with Israeli Rascal which total combat weight of 20 tons or German AGM on a 6x6 with total weight of 23 tons.
The German AGM modules itself weight 12.5tons and it is 52cal gun plus 30 155mm rds.
[url]http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htart/articles/20070713.aspx[/url]
What if the Terrex use 39 cal gun module with less ammo( say 20 rds), it could could certainly be around or lower than 10 tons payload.
So in reality it is doable.
-
Just to add to my earlier post - I have always wondered - why Terrex?
In terms of troop movers, there is the Bronco. It does or can do the same mission support for Infantry type units.
The Terrex may have better protection and turret options, but the Bronco has better off-road ability, and various versions are already in use. Both are troop movers, lighter, faster and quieter than the Bionix.
Then there is always the basic M113 APC as well. We have lots of them around. May not be in frontline armoured unit service, but can always be use as a APC (better than up-armouring a soft skin vehicle) or weapons platform.
-
More info, Hitfist 105 turret total combat weight is only 6000kg with 14rds ready in the turret( more could be stored else where in the hull of the Terrex)
More info:
[url]http://www.aiad.it/upload/aziende/azienda_/TURRETS_engl.rtf[/url]
-
105mm low velo gun plus sufficient space for ammo? or 155mm?
That being the case, then Terrax is definitely has went up my charts of good Wheel Modular IFVs.
Now I can also imagine our AMX10 replacements right away is the terrax.
That low key Bn probably has RODed/going to ROd by now. The terrax with it's multi purpose built turret will be a great descendant.
Regarding why we dont use Bronco for real armoured ops
1) armour is very low, very very low.
2) It's a 2 piece vehicle Not very practical for frontline assault. Some joker just break the link and the vehicle's kaput.
3) I heard from my friend who drove in one, the water goes into the vehicle when they do crossing.... Like knee level.
Advantages of bronco. It's fast. Very very fast. It can go from off road to wet/soft ground and back out.
Our M113s are getting really old. Not to mention, we can only repair and cannabilise the vehicles. It's not like we can build new M113s. (Also, the capabilities of the M113 can be read out like a bible by now. No matter how much you modify it, the limitations are there.)
M113s armour/powerpack/internal space is getting very insufficient for the new SAF and the aggressors we face.
Even during my(a few years back) time they are already going to phase out M113s armoured units we were told we are going to be the last few batches. So while the vehicles themselves will be around for another good 10 years, there wont be many of them left since the Bxs are being churned out.
m113s are great for mortar/ada and track support vehicles though. it's a good workhorse.
-
Originally posted by gary1910:
This new format is f**king slow and does not seem to accept BB coding!!!
Anyway, ST Engg has reported that Terrex could mount a 105mm and perhaps even 155mm howitzer but more like sales pitch than actual testing with prototype.
As for Spike, Turkey version of our Terrex was exhibited with Rafael 30mm RWS with has a 30mm cannon and a twin Spike launcher.
Will try to post the pix when the new format sort out all it's bugs.
no more bb codes, use the icons above your posting box when posting to post pics and link links.try it out and looking forward to the pic!
-
I feel that having a 105 mm MGS variant of the Terrex is not neccessary.
And it does not value add in terms of logistics. 3 different calibre, 3 different system, 120mm, 75mm and now 105mm ???
I wont be surprise if they mount SM1 gun onto Terrex
As for the Bronco, it is very versatile vehicle with the most variants.
As an articulated vehicle, it exerts much lower ground pressure as the load is spread over 4 tracks.
Bronco does not have thin armor, in fact comparable to the Ultras.
Bronco can swim well, definitely much better than the rest.
The Ultras, although old but the US army is still using them, so we are keeping them too.
With so many in service ard the world, getting spares is dirt cheap (cheap upkeep).
In fact i feel the more suitable replacement for the V150/V200 shld be the Ultras.
Most variant of the Ultras have LARGER troop compartment than the Bionix...
Have u guys seen the space in a Bionix with 2 man turret ? Pathetic...
The shortfall of the Ultras is the aluminium hull...
-
Why Terrex ?
Our doctrine is very much based on the US army.
3G army, BMS, Integrated Strike etc...
Terrex will serve as a platform catering for different need which is on-road...
I should say more for on-road ops, less for off-road...
Off-road, we have the BX, Broncos, Ultras already...
That is why i dun really agree Terrex will complement the armor ops in off-road terrain.
Terrex will definitely complement the Infantry
-
Originally posted by CM06:
Do you need add on armour? DUH. Slat is the basic. ERA, additional ceramic, steel blocks blah blah blah.
I dun think Slat is the basic. Types of add-on armor really depends on situation.
For the case of Strykers,
RPG explode upon impact.
Slat armours on Strykers soften the impact so less RPGs detonate upon impact.
-
Originally posted by CM06:
Now I can also imagine our AMX10 replacements right away is the terrax.
Well AMX 10 does not need replacements.
They actually trial vehicles with no practical usage and then passed on to the guards unit and err, Army open house Exco etc etc.
Some exhibition junk ?
-
Dont know where you listen from, Bronco's basic armour is very thin actually unless you know otherwise?
Ultra's may be alu but it's an alloy.
Slat armour is not "basic" i have made a mistake in stating that. Slat armour is more to help trigger and detonate impact warheads (like you said) before it reaches the actual armour so that the hot jet is not as well directed and hopefully be unable to melt and penetrate the actual armour. Apparently the slits are able to (on extreme circumstance) catch live rpg rounds instead. It is however not a replacement for ERA. Pretty useful to block the first few times if you go into RPG country.
Other armour add ons such as clip ons, hook ons screw ons hehe. Those are the real stuff.(Yeah these are the real basic)
Yeah you take the roads when you can. Even tracks will do that. If your road is mined & pretargeted, supported and defended by infantry in prepared positions with AT-wepaons, you will go off road - regardless wheel or track. And you dont just go around them(sometimes you dont have a choice) So whatever firepower you have combine and clear the defenders so that the engineers can clear the way for further use. In this case, wheeled vehicles might be able to travel further and hit the enemy from the rear while the tracks take the harder terrain and attack from more tactical grounds. How you use armour ...well i dont qualify for the course because i dont have stuff on my shoulders hehe so dont ask me too much.
Wheel IFVs may be advantagous on-roads but if they have to use them on off-road combat, they have no choice too. They should be best used on roads - agreed.
Err, Amx10 pass on to tom dick or harry, those guys still come to armour camp to serve their NS training hehe. They sure arent just for show. The reason why they were never picked was because (from what others said on mil nuts in the past was engine overheat problems at the least). But they have a very very useful ability that currently no armoured vehicle in the official SAF inventory has.
-
If I'm not wrong, there will be one very high tech variant of the Terrex. Its up to anyone's guess whats inside. IMO, they should load it up with C3I equipment to act as a mobile "infantry platoon/section" HQ. PC is able to coordinate his platoon from the vehicle with real time video footage + feed from platoon / coy level Micro UAV.
Think GRAW2.
-
I dont want Graw2
I want 5 terrax become super big transformer
Or you can have an L2 body terrax legs and BX2 arms and LSV head.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
If I'm not wrong, there will be one very high tech variant of the Terrex. Its up to anyone's guess whats inside. IMO, they should load it up with C3I equipment to act as a mobile "infantry platoon/section" HQ. PC is able to coordinate his platoon from the vehicle with real time video footage + feed from platoon / coy level Micro UAV.
Think GRAW2.
Yeah tat will be the Terrex command variant.
But u sounds like u just watched "Future Weapons 2" abt the Strykers
-
No, I haven't watched that yet. Got a youtube link to share?
But yeah, I'm guessing its a largely stryker model for the infantry. 2-3 Vehicles per platoon, with one command vehicle. I hope they have cable TV too...
-
Originally posted by gary1910:
Actually it could handle max 10 tons payload, not 10 tons max combat weight, so dun mix it up.
Actually the full combat weight of vanilla APC version of Terrex is abt 17.5 tonnes.
( this is for C-130 transportability)
But in reality the Terrex platform could handle up to max weight of 24 tonnes.
(Based on Janes reports in 2001, but Wiki stated now it could go as far as 25~30tons?)
Actually, if the Terrex is going to be implemented as a INFANTRY Fighting Vehicle, I got a feeling that its max combat weight will go up to 18 tons only, due to certain tactical considerations of the organic assets of the Bn ...
I doubt they will mount a 105mm gun onto the Terrex, feels like too much of a fire power to a Inf unit. I guess, they will only mount a .50 calibre gun only. Moreover, if the Terrex really mount a 105mm, will it able to mount other weapons like AGL or etc ?? -
A vehicle won't be mounted with EVERY weapon out there. If they do put a 105mm low recoil weapon, then there won't be room for an AGL or OWS.
To support infantry ops mortar support is a MUST. And maybe one tank killer variant... -
Originally posted by I_love_my_toilet:
In fact i feel the more suitable replacement for the V150/V200 shld be the Ultras.
Most variant of the Ultras have LARGER troop compartment than the Bionix...
Have u guys seen the space in a Bionix with 2 man turret ? Pathetic...
The shortfall of the Ultras is the aluminium hull...
pl read my old thread of V150/200.
SG has upgraded .No need to think for replacement for the time being.
I think we also saw in open house.Good for Field Defense and protection of Logistic line in case we have to fight overseas.........
The wheels are centralised pressurized for different terrains.
http://www.hueybravo.net/Marinepages/armor.htm