Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
116 Pages « < 8 9 10 11 12 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Military Thread V15, Gong Xi Fa Cai; Huat ah

views
     
SUSMrUbikeledek
post Jan 27 2015, 02:43 PM

On my way
****
Senior Member
580 posts

Joined: Aug 2011


QUOTE(Frozen_Sun @ Jan 27 2015, 02:13 PM)
BMP series isn't meant to withstand RPG fires....like most IFV, it should be able to resist autocannon fire on the frontal armor. BMP-3F is amphibious vehicle, so can't add thick armor on it. Slat armor will also compromise its amphibious performance.

Even M-60 tanks can be penetrated with RPG-7; we need level of protection provided by modern MBT to resist RPG fire.

Even so, modern RPG like RPG-29 can still shatter the armor of Abrams

www.liveleak.com/view?i=c1e_1263769845
*
That's the point. If you look at recent conflict, a lot of modern armies such as US and Israel, sacrificed the amphibious capability of their amphibious armored vehicle in order to provide extra protection. And look at Bionix AFV developed by Singapore. It doesn't even have amphibious capability due to it's steel construction, which is stronger than aluminium.
MilitaryMadness
post Jan 27 2015, 03:47 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,302 posts

Joined: Oct 2010
From: Over your shoulder


QUOTE(MrUbikeledek @ Jan 27 2015, 02:43 PM)
That's the point. If you look at recent conflict, a lot of modern armies such as US and Israel, sacrificed the amphibious capability of their amphibious armored vehicle in order to provide extra protection. And look at Bionix AFV developed by Singapore. It doesn't even have amphibious capability due to it's steel construction, which is stronger than aluminium.
*
Doctrine also play a part in combat vehicle design. Russia anticipates a lot of river crossings in Eastern Europe, as the Red army did in WW2, so nearly all of their combat vehicles are amphibious.

From my observation, US military is still set up as a Desert Storm-like army to fight in wide open spaces, so they don't have a lot of need for amphibious vehicles, later wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also didn't involve river crossings or amphibious operations (its main amphibious vehicle,the AAV-7 is designed in the 1970s), so the concept of amphibious vehicle is more or less neglected in the US military (ironically even in the US Marines, the premier amphibious unit).

Israel also doesn't have the need to do any river crossings or amphibious operations, thus no amphibious vehicles. So there's that. laugh.gif
thpace
post Jan 27 2015, 04:21 PM

Rising Star
******
Senior Member
1,210 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(trollboy @ Jan 27 2015, 03:57 PM)
I thot amphibious capability is quite important for us cuz malaysia is filled with rivers and islands etc
Almost all our armor is amphibious
*
just can cross river.. that also calm river or lake laugh.gif
rough river sure sink like a lead ball laugh.gif

#truestory

only truly amphibious is avv, bmp3, k21 etc those designed to work from ground up to work on water
madoka
post Jan 27 2015, 04:24 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Jan 2015
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Jan 27 2015, 03:47 PM)
Doctrine also play a part in combat vehicle design. Russia anticipates a lot of river crossings in Eastern Europe, as the Red army did in WW2, so nearly all of their combat vehicles are amphibious.

From my observation, US military is still set up as a Desert Storm-like army to fight in wide open spaces, so they don't have a lot of need for amphibious vehicles, later wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also didn't involve river crossings or amphibious operations (its main amphibious vehicle,the AAV-7 is designed in the 1970s), so the concept of amphibious vehicle is more or less neglected in the US military (ironically even in the US Marines, the premier amphibious unit).

Israel also doesn't have the need to do any river crossings or amphibious operations, thus no amphibious vehicles. So there's that.  laugh.gif
*
some countries just abandon the concept of amphibious vehicle like AAV or BMP series for amphibious assault operations and largely depend on bridge connector vehicle like LCAC and LCT to bring their weaponries ashore, some mix that concept and some simply because the lack of platform they still depend on amphibious vehicle like AAV or BMP to conduct amphibious assault operations.
thpace
post Jan 27 2015, 04:25 PM

Rising Star
******
Senior Member
1,210 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(waja2000 @ Jan 27 2015, 01:46 PM)
user posted image

Archer artillery system for Army also look good.
easy to drive using our road,
Just a bit longer, not sure will affected mobility in our forest road unsure.gif
*
more expensive than tracked variant
madoka
post Jan 27 2015, 04:27 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Jan 2015
QUOTE(thpace @ Jan 27 2015, 04:21 PM)
just can cross river.. that also calm river or lake laugh.gif
rough river sure sink like a lead ball laugh.gif

#truestory

only truly amphibious is avv, bmp3, k21 etc those designed to work from ground up to work on water
*
BTR series like BTR-80/82A/BTR-3U is fully amphibious and can withstand rough seas at sea state 2 maximum. Although the lacking of ramp door at the back is bane for any armies who using them in large numbers.......
thpace
post Jan 27 2015, 04:30 PM

Rising Star
******
Senior Member
1,210 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(madoka @ Jan 27 2015, 04:27 PM)
BTR series like BTR-80/82A/BTR-3U is fully amphibious and can withstand rough seas at sea state 2 maximum. Although the lacking of ramp door at the back is bane for any armies who using them in large numbers.......
*
iinm btr was designed from ground up to work on water as part of the requirements. same as bmp

most modern one have only basic water crossing capabilities
SUSMrUbikeledek
post Jan 27 2015, 07:34 PM

On my way
****
Senior Member
580 posts

Joined: Aug 2011



waja2000
post Jan 27 2015, 07:48 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
137 posts

Joined: Oct 2006
just read airbus helicopter 2015 sales target ....
they listed malaysia "possible" in EC725 batch 2 with 6~12 unit and Tiger helicopter.

This post has been edited by waja2000: Jan 27 2015, 07:50 PM
KYPMbangi
post Jan 27 2015, 07:59 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
39 posts

Joined: Jun 2008


QUOTE(waja2000 @ Jan 27 2015, 07:48 PM)
just read airbus helicopter 2015 sales target ....
they listed malaysia "possible" in EC725 batch 2 with 6~12 unit and Tiger helicopter.
*
Passive aggressive marketing strategy?
waja2000
post Jan 27 2015, 08:04 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
137 posts

Joined: Oct 2006
QUOTE(KYPMbangi @ Jan 27 2015, 07:59 PM)
Passive aggressive marketing strategy?
*
company need estimation for sales leh...
maybe just there estimation..
azriel
post Jan 27 2015, 08:45 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
4 posts

Joined: Jan 2012
QUOTE
Indonesia's defence minister requests USD400m defence budget boost

Jon Grevatt, Bangkok - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
26 January 2015
   
Indonesia's Defence Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu has requested IDR5.1 trillion (USD409 million) to boost the country's 2015 defence budget, according to media reports in Indonesia.

The request was tabled during a meeting between Ryacudu and the House of Representatives committee on foreign affairs and defence, which took place on 26 January. While the Ministry of Defence in Jakarta confirmed that the meeting took place, it did not confirm the budget request.

However, reports said Ryacudu has requested the additional funding to support military procurement activities and replace some of the Indonesian Armed Force's (TNI's) ageing equipment.

Should additional funding be secured by the TNI it would take Indonesia's defence budget to more than IDR100 trillion.


http://www.janes.com/article/48323/indones...ce-budget-boost
azriel
post Jan 27 2015, 08:47 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
4 posts

Joined: Jan 2012
QUOTE
PM puts hurry up on defence budgets

6th Jan 2015

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha is pushing the military to more quickly draft its spending plans for the 2016 fiscal year and submit them within the month.

Air Force commander ACM Treetod Sonjance said the Defence Ministry, the Royal Thai Armed Forces Headquarters, the Royal Thai Army, the Royal Thai Navy and the Royal Thai Air Force are expected to prepare their budgets by mid-January.

He said Gen Prayut, who is also head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), wants to see how the armed forces and other military units prioritise their spending.

The Royal Thai Air Force has no plan to procure new fighter jets in the next budget year, ACM Treetod said. It will focus on upgrades and maintenance instead.

Preliminary plans call for upgrades to the air force's fleet of F-5 jets at the Nakhon Sawan-based Wing 4 division. The aircraft have been in service for over 30 years.

A Defence Ministry source said the proposed defence spending is likely to be a little higher than the amount approved in 2015. It is estimated to be around 193 billion to 200 billion baht.

According to the source, the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) approved a defence budget of 192 billion baht, about 550 million baht lower than the proposed 193.49 billion baht.

Of this amount, the Office of the Defence Permanent Secretary received 7.771 billion baht, the Royal Thai Armed Forces Headquarters 14.77 billion baht, the Royal Thai Army 95.48 billion baht, the Royal Thai Navy 37.52 billion baht, and the Royal Thai Air Force 35.7 billion baht.

Defence spending for the 2014 fiscal year was estimated at 184 billion baht.

According to the source, the navy is likely to propose the procurement of two to three submarines.

The navy has been vetting submarines from various countries including South Korea, China, Russia and France. South Korea's U-209 model is said to be the least expensive at 11 billion baht apiece.

Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon has backed the submarine purchase in principle, saying he was ready to support the navy's plan to develop its capacity if there was enough money to go around.

The source said the army is likely to propose the procurement of helicopters for general use under a budget of 2.8 billion baht. About 30 UH-1H (Huey) helicopters will be decommissioned. The US-made UH-72 (Lakota) aircraft is said to be on the army's wish list.

The army also has a plan to purchase a transporter aircraft under a budget of 1.25 billion baht. Ukraine's Antonov-30 and Spain's CN-295 are said to be at the top of the list.
Meanwhile, ACM Treetod said an air force committee is working on choosing a new fleet of training aircraft to replace the L-39 model.

The air force has allocated 3.7 billion baht in the 2015 budget to procure a new fleet of training aircraft to replace the L-39 aircraft manufactured by the Czech Republic.

There are three contenders that meet the initial specifications: T-50 aircraft from South Korea, M-346 from Italy; and the Textron Airland Scorpion from the US. The South Korean aircraft is expected to come at the top of the list.


http://www.defencereviewasia.com/articles/...defence-budgets

This post has been edited by azriel: Jan 27 2015, 08:48 PM
azriel
post Jan 27 2015, 08:55 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
4 posts

Joined: Jan 2012
QUOTE(Frozen_Sun @ Jan 27 2015, 10:38 AM)
Odd couple in TNI-AD aviation corps... 2018 onwards.....one for precision strike, another for wholesale massacre with dual-30mm cannons and rockets

user posted image
*
There are not much video of the Indonesian Army Aviation Mi-35P firing it's dual 30mm cannons and rockets in a live firing exercise but here's one.



This post has been edited by azriel: Jan 27 2015, 09:07 PM
Frozen_Sun
post Jan 27 2015, 09:33 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
41 posts

Joined: Sep 2013
QUOTE(azriel @ Jan 27 2015, 08:55 PM)
There are not much video of the Indonesian Army Aviation Mi-35P firing it's dual 30mm cannons and rockets in a live firing exercise but here's one.


*
Also, the non-existing one is the live fire of Ataka ATGM

user posted image
waja2000
post Jan 27 2015, 09:36 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
137 posts

Joined: Oct 2006
Last time plan on A319, now just think on A321LR, too big for A321LR, for as A319MPA already enough
i think A319MPA (ACJ319 spec) more suitable as, more low cost for plant cost. A321LR maybe suitable for Euro country need patrol ocean.
too bad Airbus military said need 20 order only will start production line. brows.gif
this one Yinchet also like ....

QUOTE
Airbus' A321neo LR Could Be A Perfect Platform For A Future European Maritime Patrol Aircraft

Our colleagues from the French strategic and defense newsletter "TTU" published an interesting analysis of a possible military application for Airbus' latest airliner project. During a press conference held in Toulouse on January 13, Fabrice Brégier, Airbus President and CEO, announced the imminent launch of a new "Long Range" version of the A321 airliner.

Scheduled for entry into service in late 2018 and named "A321neo LR", this aircraft will be developed from the cell of the new A321neo and will have transatlantic range. It will be capable of flying 100 more nautical miles compared to the Boeing 757-200W used on the commercial segment. The aircraft will have a practical operating range of 3900 nautical miles thanks to the three additional fuel tanks increasing the range by about 500 nautical miles (compared to the standard A321neo performance).

With the new A321neo LR project, Airbus will be able to design a credible (and affordable) successor to the Atlantique (ATL 2) and P-3 Orion Maritime Patrol Aircraft currently used extensively among NATO members. Both types of MPAs fitted with turboprop engines are getting old despited several modernization and update programs. At present, there are only two types of MPAs fitted with turbofan engines:
- Boeing's P-8 Poseidon which has the fuselage of a 737-800 and the wings of a 737-900 commercial aircraft (130 P-8A ordered by the US Navy to replace the P-3 Orion and 8 P-8I ordered the Indian Navy to replace Il-18 "May").
- Kawasaki's P-1 which was designed from a clean sheet for maritime patrol missions. Because of this and the relatively limited production numbers (so far, only Japan has placed orders for the type) its price is a problem for potential export. The Japanese government however is apparently trying to market the P-1 to the UK.

user posted image
Computer rendering of an A319MPA in Indian Navy colors. Picture: Airbus Military


Airbus current MPAs, based on the CN235 and CN295, or Alenia's ATR 72 MPA all lack range (ocean capacities) and have limited weapons payload capacity when compared to the existing ATL2, P-3 Orion and the new generation P-8 and P-1. Ten years ago, the German branch of Airbus conducted studies on A320MPA and A319MPA for the German Navy. The A321neo LR should prove to be the most sensible basis for a future European MPA.

In addition, every systems and sub-systems suppliers already exist in Europe to turn the A321neo LR into an "ITAR free" MPA likely to interest several countries. This an opportunity and Airbus should not miss it, supported by European engine and equipment manufacturers.

Link


This post has been edited by waja2000: Jan 27 2015, 09:39 PM
SUSLumiaaa
post Jan 27 2015, 09:43 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
172 posts

Joined: Sep 2014
From: LYN
Missiles on a a320?????
waja2000
post Jan 27 2015, 09:50 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
137 posts

Joined: Oct 2006
QUOTE(Lumiaaa @ Jan 27 2015, 09:43 PM)
Missiles on a a320?????
*
anti ship missile on MPA is normal.

This post has been edited by waja2000: Jan 27 2015, 09:50 PM
madoka
post Jan 27 2015, 10:27 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Jan 2015
Chinese SAM for RMK-11 wishlist according to Marhalim, it was an interesting development
thpace
post Jan 27 2015, 10:37 PM

Rising Star
******
Senior Member
1,210 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(madoka @ Jan 27 2015, 10:27 PM)
Chinese SAM for RMK-11 wishlist according to Marhalim, it was an interesting development
*
he saying for budget constraint.. china sam would be best choice given the current malaysia economic down turn.; SAM was already long in the wishlist

there also report we was interested in the Buk-M2E and Pantsir-S1 according to Rosoboronexport press statement ahead of DSA-2014

there also MOU with local firm for HQ-16 system, which i would is very tempting including technology transfer and license production as part of the deal

There also VL-Mica for commonality if mica will be selected for Gowind class

I would say there alot of bell and whistle by exporter but it look like we are still undecided on what system to purchase. Since it for base defence, it could be just one batteries laugh.gif

116 Pages « < 8 9 10 11 12 > » 
Bump Topic Topic ClosedOptions New Topic
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0281sec    0.48    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 7th December 2025 - 09:41 PM