u need few guys just to set the M 777 gun in right direction.

all becos in 21 st century,M 777 is powerless!!

No engine is installed,just hydro mechanism for adjusting elelvation.

u just need one small guy to press few buttons and let the engine

set the guns.No sweat,brothers.

M 777 brutal force operations.

i find oz SPH spec here

http://markwr.mailcan.com/T5C/091%20SOW%20(Acquisition)%20Annex%20A%20-%20Part%20A%20-%20DEF(AUST)%208484%20Artillery%20Replacement%20Project%20FPS.pdf

www

DEF(AUST) 8484 / Issue 1 LAND 17 Artillery Replacement Project ...

 -

This is a sales pitch for M 777.

I dunt think this is a balanced analysis.

The author just forget the disagvantage of immobility of M777

and forget the advantage of Pegasus,as written by himself---

''a powered
Ammunition Loading System
(ALS), and power the deployment
of the system.''

http://www.adbr.com.au/download/Features%20Articles/V26N6_Land17.pdf

''The ‘Pegasus’ is heavier
than the M777 (5.4 tonnes versus
3.2 tonnes), because it is fitted
with a 21kW Auxiliary Power
Unit (APU) providing hydraulic
pressure to drive the wheels (at
up to 12kph), operate a powered
Ammunition Loading System
(ALS), and power the deployment
of the system.
Similar in concept to the motive
system that powers the
‘Mobicon’ container handler system,
the ‘Pegasus’ Auxiliary
Power Unit needs to be engineered
to survive the shock and
vibration of gun firing.

...

The advantage of using an All
Terrain Vehicle compared to the
‘Pegasus’ APU is borne out in
much lower acquisition and
sustainment costs, as the ATV can
be subsequently freed up for
other operational uses, such as
towing ammunition, after the
M777 is positioned.''

M777----rod ramming.watch video at 3.10 minute

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1943.html

Pegasus----just put on tray and let the machine do the job.

before u tell me fo.pl read what are the differences between

M777 and Pegasus.the former is powerless,the latter come with APU.

so,there is no flick rammer in M 777!!

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/337139?page=2

flick rammer in Pegasus!!

@@@@@@@@@

In the decision making process,u shall weigh all the pros and cons.

shall we just put too much emphasis on one single factor.

Oz just put  too much weigh on weight.So,oz have to trade off

mobility.The price is immovable,unless moved by many guys

horses,and donkeys!!

YAWNZ

the lion, knows not the meaning of futility
his posts are, of negative utility
i look upon him,
with eyes of gentle pity.

for he knows not what he has done
when his time to be undone,
i wait upon the rim,
for me to have some fun.

"no flick rammer"
he says
yadda yadda spammer
we see

"aus have procurement issues'
he squeals
"just let him wipe his ass clean by giving him a pack of tissues"
or so the crowd ensued

oh lionnoisy oh lionnoisy
fail not to be my muse
noisy noisy noisy noisy damned hell noisy
you are what that lights my fuse

this poem is barely lyrical
and yet its highly critical
althought its quite obtuse
im sure its bound to amuse.

nice poem.

facts speak louder than poem.

will u make a important just base on one important factors and forget

other factors?

@@@@@@@@@@

smart mate.The threadhold of 5040 kg can effectively keep

Pegasus from the game!!

http://www.adbr.com.au/download/2689.pdf

The LW155 requirement seeks
the supply of between 18 and 35
towed, air-portable 155mm artillery
systems. The term ‘lightweight’
is bounded by a maximum of under
5,040kg, in order to allow for
operational deployment by a
Boeing CH-47D ‘Chinook’ operating
in the hot and high environment
of Afghanistan. There is
also provision for inclusion of a
Weapon Management System
(WMS) or on-board BMS-F Fire
Control System (FCS) within the
LW155 requirement.
Commercial offers for the
LW155 are likely to be received
by Defence from only BAES - with
a choice of different M777 options,
and Singapore Technologies
Kinetics (STK), with their ‘Pegasus’
LW155.

@@@@@@@@@@@@

Pegasus is 5400 kg!!

Originally posted by lionnoisy:

nice poem.

facts speak louder than poem.

will u make a important just base on one important factors and forget

other factors?

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:Compatibility> <w:UseFELayout /> </w:Compatibility> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser /> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

@@@@@@@@@@

smart mate.The threadhold of 5040 kg can effectively keep

Pegasus from the game!!

http://www.adbr.com.au/download/2689.pdf

The LW155 requirement seeks
the supply of between 18 and 35
towed, air-portable 155mm artillery
systems. The term ‘lightweight’
is bounded by a maximum of under
5,040kg, in order to allow for
operational deployment by a
Boeing CH-47D ‘Chinook’ operating
in the hot and high environment
of Afghanistan. There is
also provision for inclusion of a
Weapon Management System
(WMS) or on-board BMS-F Fire
Control System (FCS) within the
LW155 requirement.
Commercial offers for the
LW155 are likely to be received
by Defence from only BAES - with
a choice of different M777 options,
and Singapore Technologies
Kinetics (STK), with their ‘Pegasus’
LW155.

@@@@@@@@@@@@

Pegasus is 5400 kg!!<!--[endif]-->

 

its all about the weight
and the little issue of freight
will he take the bait,
or shall i lie in wait ?

your purpose isnt clear
acting up arent you my dear ?
maybe its even out of fear,
when one cannot but fail to convince,
one is asking to be minced

by the sheer logic be prepared to be shred
for i shall impose upon thee like judge dredd
for all intents and purposes, your objective dead
your conduct unsanctionable, in obfusticating this thread.

unrepetant you appear to be
or even, are you afraid of me ?
for over a nice hot cup of tea
tear your points apart for free

The ST guy speaks in a undiplomatic way about M 777.

Sunday, November 9, 2008

http://sinscity-livinginsincity.blogspot.com/2008/11/pegasus-defends-singapore.html

Pegasus defends Singapore

//The Pegasus is made in Singapore but no sitting duck.
Its only other equivalent in the world is the American M777, but even that pales in comparison to the Pegasus and the differences are great.
The M777 is not heli-portable (lion note--this is wrong)and does not have an auxiliary power unit, said Mr Teo Chew Kwee, deputy general manager of Kinetics Design and Development. He was speaking to my paper at the Defence TechX exhibition yesterday.
He led the team of engineers at ST Kinetics that came up with the world's first lightweight, self-propelled 155mm howitzer. A creation of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), the Defence Science & Technology Agency and ST Kinetics, the Pegasus is slated to replace the SAF's 37 ageing French Nexter Systems towed 105mm LG1 light guns.
Mr differences that Pegasus packs more punch are he said are:
* Auxiliary Power Unit (APU)
It provides the gun with a short-range self-propelled capability. With the APU, the system can manoeuvre over terrain at a speed of 12 kmh. Mr Teo said: "By incorporating this power pack, we allow the Pegasus' functions to be automated. This is unlike the M777, which is manually operated by six people on each side of the legs, with brute force.'
* Ammunition Loading System (ALS)
Powered by the APU, the ALS loads ammunition to alleviate crew fatigue. This allows the crew to operate the Pegasus longer with a burst rate of three rounds in 24 seconds. "It's like sticking a bomb into the barrel,"
* Innovative recoil management
The recoil of the Pegasus is a third lower than conventional 155mm howitzers. "That's how we reduce the overall loading on the gun structure," he explained.
* Ease of deployment
The Pegasus is easy to configure. Through a simple seesaw action that shifts the gun's centre of gravity to suit different missions, it can be deployed in less than 2.5 minutes with eight men. He said: "An M777, when fired upon, cannot move. But the Pegasus can quickly fold up and move elsewhere."
* Lightweight materials
The Pegasus employs lightweight materials like titanium and high-alloy aluminium that provide the strength and stability required to withstand the recoil force. "The Pegasus looks totally unconventional. Every component is multi-tasked," he said.This baby is the best of Singapore,by thinking out of the box.//

OMG, the loss of common sense. Which salesman would say his rival products are better ???

Originally posted by gd4u:

OMG, the loss of common sense. Which salesman would say his rival products are better ???

you cant lose something which wasnt there in the first place.

ask him is the pegasus combat proven anot. and he'd tell you its better than the combat proven m777.  completely illogic. thats lionnoisy for you.

*ladies and gentlemen, lets give it up for a round of warm applause for Lionnoisy's epic self-pwn [yet again]*

</claps>

Originally posted by sgstars:

you cant lose something which wasnt there in the first place.

ask him is the pegasus combat proven anot. and he'd tell you its better than the combat proven m777.  completely illogic. thats lionnoisy for you.

*ladies and gentlemen, lets give it up for a round of warm applause for Lionnoisy's epic self-pwn [yet again]*

</claps>

Ai ya!u think in the same mind set like in ATTC.

wat u mean is Any platform go into war  mean it is proven.

It only will be proved if it is up to the task after assessment.

In UK ATTC,The BAE Viking  is proved not up to the

requirements of UK MOD!!

If MOD follow your logic ,why UK MOD need Singapore Bronco ATTC to replace

Viking?

UK confirms to buy more than 100 Bronco worths 150 m pounds

@@@@@@@@

1.Do u think the M777 crews would be happy to rod ramming every

round into the chamer?How long can the crews substain to

ram the shells into the chambers.

The gun can substain the firing,but not the crews.

All human will feel tired.In Pegasus,this is the flick

rammer do the job.Can u see the differences?

2.Do u think they will be happy to shift the gun say 10 meter

uphill like a hell?M777 is a powerless platform.

This is no joke to shift a 4770 kg monster,especially

in muddy or uphill terrain!!In Pegasus ,it is like driving

a lorry.

Just to mention two of the weakness of M 777.

@@@@@@@@@@@@

Now,i want to talk about oz forgo the mobility of Pegasus

(and  other towed howitzer with short distant SP ability)

and oz just emphasis on the ligher weight of M777.

With Pegasus,the crews can shift the gun to another point

to escape counter fire,say 500 meter away or 5 km away ,with little effort.

Also,crews no need to rod ram every  shell into the chambers.

Setting and retrive the gun also need less effort than M777.

@@@@@@@@@

air transportabilty

M777 gain some advantages in this factor.

But what is the possibilty do u need transport 2 or 3 guns

in one sorite?

@@@@@@@@2

Cost,benefits and risks

All decision shall base on these factors.

Originally posted by lionnoisy:

Cost,benefits and risks

All decision shall base on these factors.

 

Based on your lion factors !!! ? Or by aust need and requirement factors ?

and so the lion wishes to test his logic ?
and i shall happily frolic
in his lalaland of superflous licks
he is about to get a vicious kick.

UK MOD bought
STK bronco for reasons Nought
that have to do with BvS10 and Bvs206 thoughts,
for these brave steeds have travelled in afghanistan with danger frought
have they not served the UK Royal marines without a thought

if this lion could read
ild be counting beads
for he fails to feed
Upon the information seed

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/MilitaryOperations/MarinesBackInTheVikingstheyArePhenomenal.htm

Marines back in the Vikings – "They are phenomenal"

A Military Operations news article

13 Feb 08

The Viking All Terrain Protected Vehicles have proved so effective on operations in Afghanistan that the Marines who drive them are back in Helmand. And there is no other vehicle they'd rather be in. Report by Danny Chapman.

Royal Marines, escorted by a Viking Armoured Vehicle, patrol through the narrow streets of Gereshk watched by members of the Afghan National Police (ANP)
[Picture: LA (Phot) Gaz Faulkner]

The Viking is a Royal Marine asset, but due to their popularity the demand for their use is high amongst all troops patrolling and conducting operations in Helmand. Consequently, the demand on the Marines trained to drive them is high too.

...

"Apart from that I can't fault them at all. I am actually in love with this vehicle! You couldn't ask for a better vehicle. It can go anywhere, it doesn't need set patterns and it's not restricted to certain routes."

Major Stemp explained why the Viking is so good:

"The Viking was brought into the Royal Marine Corps five or six years ago. It was a new concept, as we'd not had protected mobility before. We put in a wish list of what we wanted from a vehicle and the MOD fulfilled this."

Another Royal Marine back in Bastion from the Royal Marines' Armoured Support Company is Lance Corporal Dean Walker, aged 21. He said:

"The Viking opens up a lot more operations. We can move where, with and who we want."

"The battlefield is a fast moving place and the Viking is capable of keeping the enemy on the back foot," asserted Cpl Whitby.

And Marine Aylett added:

"They provide us with a lot of protection and allow us to get closer to the enemy. It's very reliable, can go up a hill and never gets bogged down like other vehicles."

Phenomenal
Good
Reliable

superflous they may seem
excellence is what they are.
blooded in combat
proven in war
they arent like a bronco
all new and raw
only the lion appears to be
a mindless rah rah supporter of STK technology

why the british love their vikings
maybe because it suit their likings
to call them not up to tasking
maybe a question worth asking

why, when and how

can lionnoisy explain this now ?

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/KeepingTheVikingsOnTheMovevideo.htm

The Vikings are unstoppable in Afghanistan. The All Terrain Protected Vehicles' arrival at a scene of conflict instils relief in British Troops, confidence in the local population and, perhaps most importantly, fear in the Taliban.

"They are extremely good for rocking up and scaring the shit out of the Taliban. They really don't like it," says Corporal Kev Walker

Before arriving in Helmand Cpl Walker hadn't seen the Viking on operations. Despite some initial teething problems, he is impressed:

"I think they're doing a fantastic job. They're awesome vehicles for what they do. The teething problems were down to the terrain. If you put any vehicle across that terrain, which is mountainous, rocky, dusty and sandy and has everything that will knacker up gears, it will have trouble with it."

"They make a massive difference to the operation."

Corporal Kev Walker, 1 Battalion Royal Electrical & Mechanical Engineers

The Vikings are often called into a situation to take up a position of overwatch. They are used as taxis for getting troops into an area other vehicles would not be able to access, and can also be used as ambulances; getting casualties out of a situation:

"They make a massive difference to the operation," says Cpl Walker. "We were working closely with the Ghurkhas and the Royal Welsh and you could see the relief on their faces when the Viking turns up.

"The Royal Welsh got contacted by an anti aircraft gun. My troop went in with the Vikings to create a screen, allowing them to get out. We put down heavy fire from the Viking's General Purpose Machine Gun (It is also fitted with 350 calibre guns), and before we left, having taken no casualties, it looked like all the Taliban had left. If we didn't have something like the Viking it wouldn't have been such a happy ending. It was pretty heavy terrain too and I'm not sure any other vehicle could have got in there."

Viking, at Bovington in Dorset, demonstrates the tightest of turning circles
[Picture: Andrew Linnett]

Their mobility also allows them to veer off main roads and known routes - which tend to be where most mines are laid. Staff Sergeant Chris Hanks, also a REME in Bastion explains:

"They can cope with the terrain because they have track mobility, which is much better than wheeled vehicles and gets bogged down less."

"We know the Taliban don't like them. They're pretty much unstoppable," adds Cpl Walker.

how now noisy lion ?
account for this can you now ?

talk is cheap
crap is shit
lionnoisy rolls over it
time and again
repeated again
lionnoisy self-pwn his name

if noisy lion had a mane
it would have be shaved off
long ago in shame
i think he is quite like madoff
conning pennies out of dames

cheap parlour tricks
machiam big blood sucking tick
you are become quite a prick
think you deserve this intellectual kick

answer me now
o wise lion how
can you prove,
why did UK MOD bronco choose
because if you cannot disprove
around your neck,
tightens the noose

LOL, lion is so cute. U think if the F-15E wasn't combat proven, RSAF would choose it over Eurofighter and Rafale ???