I'd prefer new MRAPs, that way we can ask for some maintenance support (like spare parts) in the purchase contract with manufacturer.

"heavy, potential maintenance headache and makan minyak'? hehe you're talking aout 90% of all military vehicles la like that bro

I don't think we have any problems or restrictions with US, also by nature these types of vehicles not very high tech like fighters or navy ships that US sometimes are reluctant to sell to other countries because of their tech. But again I prefer we make business with countries that are already friendly with us or with more liberal arms sales policy.

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: Nov 17 2014, 09:54 PM

UN mission is high-tempo type of deployment, with almost daily patrols, high fuel consumption and high vehicle turnover to maintenance.. not sure they can bear that

I don't understand why all the fuss is about MRAPs being heavy, with high fuel consumption and hard to service & maintain? All military vehicles are guilty of that.

-Armored vehicles are heavy (obviously)
-Heavy vehicles need powerful engines that gulps down fuel
-Most military vehicles have parts especially made for that vehicle or a few like it (due to task specialization, for example a tank will need different parts from a transport truck), so of course la hard to get parts

Tell me what military vehicle don't have the above problems?

US problems with MRAPs stem due to the fact they bought off-the-shelf many MRAP types from many manufacturers (in order to bulk up the numbers) , so naturally US military will need different parts for each MRAP from each different manufacturers and each type will need its own specialized maintenance routine. That is the actual problem with the US MRAP program, too many types from too many manufacturers. It is a myth to say the fact that MRAPs themselves are problematic.

If US military got MRAPs from normal military channels, the problems won't be so apparent.

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: Nov 17 2014, 10:09 PM

The reason maf chooses apc over mrap is probably due to it's limited role of mrap on conventional battlefield as these asset would serve in malaysian soil in the future (speculation only, I'm not even sure maf even consider mrap in the first place)

MRAP have stellar records on iraq and afghan theater, pretty sure these would no doubt would be used in lebanon too
Have to consider also that hezbollah firepower can rival those of lebanon army, their atgm inventory is not to be underestimated

Malaysia soil not realy good for wheels vehicles. Confirm stuck or not least slow down.

Tracked are more resilient.

Thought, i always wonder we have the option to get the mordern t90 instead we opt for those poland soviet design tanks. Not that, i say it bad but why take an old design when we was officially offered one of the latest.

The irony with your statement is that until very recently, nearly the majority all our military vehicles are wheeled (Condor, Panhard, Ferret, V-100 Commando & Sibmas) with tracked vehicles only a very few exceptions (Scorpion & Stormer).

Even with newer vehicles like MIFV (Adnan) and PT-91, these are very few and far between compared to the many hundreds of wheeled armored vehicles we are still using.

And don't get me started on AV8....confirm will stuck la

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: Nov 17 2014, 11:44 PM

The condition of payment to the polish is the deal breaker, 2/3 of the payment is in form of various projects and palm oil

our mkm was also paid in mainly in palm oil export, why does the russian does not agree to the same condition?

or was it because it was before the mkm deal and the russian no need for palm oil?

goverment ties are good

civilian does not like each other

The problem is most 6x6 MRAPs are mammoth beasts the size of buses that aren't exactly very conducive for peacekeeping operations. A huge MRAP might give wrong signals to the parties involved.

That's why for me, the best peacekeeping operations are run by small humvee or land rover-type vehicles. I prefer if we can get some smaller category 1 MRAPs that's a bit larger than land rovers but not as large as most 6x6 MRAPs. Price is cheaper, lighter weight, easier to maintain because they mostly use commercial truck parts & engines, can carry good amount of 5-6 infantrymen if needed and most importantly they have that 'peacekeeper' look to them (military, but not too much military).

Basically we'll be using them as armored land rovers

Any love for v-hull recon vehicle? they're practically also mine-resistant and can stand small arms fire also most size like humvee

Iveco lynx looks like ordinary military 4wd but with v-hull

Thai army helicopter crashes, kills 9


The two-blade, twin-engine Bell 212 helicopter crashed 10 minutes after it took off from an army camp in Phayao province



[NST]




RIP..

This post has been edited by KYPMbangi: Nov 18 2014, 01:33 AM

Yes, lots of love,although protection not as good as MRAPs. Turkey makes some good ones, made by Otokar, like Cobra and Scorpion.


Otokar Akrep (Scorpion)


Otokar Cobra

Plus Turkey already BFF with Malaysia, I'm sure if we are serious we can get some easy.

In the comment section of Marhalim blog someone commented that Malaysia was offered the Leopard 1's and there were even proposal to fit it's turret on a T-72 hulls. Any confirmation?



Well India did that with their EX.Tank fitting Arjun Turrets on T-72 hulls. The project eventually was scrapped.



This post has been edited by azriel: Nov 18 2014, 10:44 AM

in the end also get the t90...

t72 one thing good is its reliability, the rest armor protection can be said to be subpar.. blow up alot.. even from syrian video can be seen this apparent problem

hope the next tank we will get have better protection and a little more modern compared to tis soviet era design

IMHO, malaysia should set higher weight limit for their tank requirements, maybe specific a larger track modification which can be done without much issues

Why not opt for active protection system instead? you don't have to sacrifice mobility for more weight

Still would have to chuck out money for it though, Russian arena-e would cost usd$300,000 per-tank to be installed and only adds to 1.1ton to the overall weight of the tank



The only problem is to tell the infantry not to get too close with tank in case the system activates

era brick and aps is russian solution to weak armor

i yet to see the new arena on t90 anyone seen a picture of it?

though big n heavy mbt are also going for aps, even K2 will have APS as part of the tank in the future. I always a supporter of K2, just that it not ready. Now that even turkey have it maybe we can ask for one as well

I waiting how t99 armata going to look like, from the render photo, macam using oscillating turret only like the one in earlier AMX series

The problem with western armor is that they have not yet experience conflict that warrants an active protection system, israeli experience with hamas/fatah/hezbollah manning heavyweight atgm pushes them to complement their already bulky merkava with trophy aps system

RIP.. shit happens

Regarding merkava it was their idf own downfall

They was proud of their merkava being invincible to any attacks by hamas/hezbollah etc. They even make information on the tank protection public which hamas eventually studies the tank design and exploit it weakness.

One of it is the proud hyrid troop carrying capabities of the merkeva. Hamas eventually start ainming at the door and ignore the rest of the area. Tat way they could kill all the troop inside even they didn't destroy the tank. One tank destroy so wat? Kill a soldier inside have more longer lasting fear factor. Eventually, idf stop carring troops on the merkeva

Another was, the space between the turret and hull. In merkeva, there a huge gap especially at turret rear. They will just fire cheap rpg7 into tat space , tat will jam the turret or if lucky kill the gunner. Now tat space is lined with heavy steel chain and ball in hope the rpg will explode outside

Another was shooting it weak tracks and waiting for the crew to come out repair them. After they come out, more rpg barrrage and sniper will hunt them. Back then, idf seldom use recovery vehcicle with their tanks

Last was the most funny so far i read about. Was how the counter the thropy aps. That was actually firing 3 rpg in the same time. 3 in line will fire, in hope thropy will counter first two and miss the third. Thropy is not 100% effective similar to others. Another source claimed that that techique was discovered by the chenchn rebel when they face russian tank armed with arena aps

It was also claimed, that how the russian develop their latest rpg to counter mordern aps systen.

This post has been edited by thpace: Nov 18 2014, 12:45 PM