QUOTE(KYPMbangi @ Apr 1 2015, 03:50 PM)
yepaku ada simpan gambar tp x tau kat mana
Military Thread V16
|
|
Apr 1 2015, 03:53 PM
Return to original view | Post
#21
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 1 2015, 05:03 PM
Return to original view | Post
#22
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 6 2015, 01:38 AM
Return to original view | Post
#23
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 8 2015, 04:32 PM
Return to original view | Post
#24
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 8 2015, 05:10 PM
Return to original view | Post
#25
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 8 2015, 07:04 PM
Return to original view | Post
#26
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
QUOTE(thpace @ Apr 8 2015, 05:58 PM) Other program replacement. Av8 more of hostile enviroment while 6x6 for more peaceful patrols Pars already have it yesOn second pic... what is that self propelled artillery.. macam kenal but lazy check to see Policy from mahathir time.. he dont like them not Indo have no problem getting techs from them nor is turkey and other muslim majority nations I thought pars already have it here since gempita. Maybe for camera show only and bring back to turkey Faster and lightweight. Thus, good enough for general patrol duty Not sure what the actual amount. The last i heard was less than 50 unit for initial batch and partially sponsored by UN. Someone from deftech told me before that if such low amount might just purchase direct from turkey than built our own assembly line like the gempita but Gempita itself is now a very different technology from PARS except for design that's why DEFTECH are very confident that the 6x6 version will perform better in the selection IINM the IVECO 6x6 is one of the favorite ![]() |
|
|
Apr 8 2015, 08:37 PM
Return to original view | Post
#27
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
QUOTE(thpace @ Apr 8 2015, 07:59 PM) I think this 6x6 the army have no full say what they want.. must follow UN term and condition also UN gave them spec, ATM choose oh well.. since it partially sponsored what get i also dont mind as long keep our troop on ground safe UN pay, ATM uses and bawak balik free QUOTE(waja2000 @ Apr 8 2015, 08:07 PM) Meh, if I see one then I belip |
|
|
Apr 9 2015, 12:50 AM
Return to original view | Post
#28
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 9 2015, 01:54 AM
Return to original view | Post
#29
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 9 2015, 12:27 PM
Return to original view | Post
#30
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Apr 9 2015, 08:42 AM) Probably just me, but I don't think a RWS turret is a good tactical choice. Sure, the gunner will be more protected from enemy fire, but there are tons of drawbacks to it. there are many pros and cons of RWS, 1)Little environmental awareness & limited outside view for commander 2)no protecting armor makes the attached weapons & cameras are extremely vulnerable to damage by shrapnel & stray rounds 3)the camera/remote firing system, commander and gunner using space inside the vehicle itself instead of a dedicated fighting space inside an external turret thereby making the vehicle interior more cramped and restricts space for infantrymen (in case of APC and IFV) 4)if the gun develops any problems, for example misfires and jamming or being misaligned in battle, lack of access means a crewman will have to literally get out of a hatch and climb onto the roof to repair it (potentially in the middle of a battle) mostly depend on the situation there is where RWS and its optics are very useful plus the RWS can be control remotely via the gunners inside the IFV or the soldier outside |
|
|
Apr 9 2015, 02:31 PM
Return to original view | Post
#31
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 9 2015, 10:39 PM
Return to original view | Post
#32
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 10 2015, 01:38 AM
Return to original view | Post
#33
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
QUOTE(Dreadstar @ Apr 9 2015, 10:41 PM) Soon, I hopeQUOTE(thpace @ Apr 10 2015, 12:49 AM) Should beQUOTE(waja2000 @ Apr 10 2015, 01:20 AM) I do hope navy will also consider NSM for base and coastal defend |
|
|
Apr 10 2015, 12:47 PM
Return to original view | Post
#34
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 10 2015, 03:17 PM
Return to original view | Post
#35
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 10 2015, 07:29 PM
Return to original view | Post
#36
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 11 2015, 11:00 PM
Return to original view | Post
#37
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 15 2015, 07:25 AM
Return to original view | Post
#38
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 15 2015, 01:14 PM
Return to original view | Post
#39
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
|
|
Apr 16 2015, 04:23 PM
Return to original view | Post
#40
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
QUOTE(thpace @ Apr 16 2015, 03:21 PM) Yes.. the SU-30SM is based on development data from MKI and MKM variant but replaced with russian components of the same system the prototype of the MKM is kept by the russianBy far our MKM variant is the most complex of the su-30 series, Not in term of technology but integration of several western and russian system together. Some even say the MKM is the golden plated version of the su-30 series there an article posted by one forummer here before saying that the russian want to keep the two prototype MKM at their Irkut plant could be atreyuangel or yinchet, i not sure which of them posted this before Plus, the news T50 is also said to based on the su35/30 with some outer modification to enable some stealth feature. Considering how similar they look it not surprising some was saying the after burner fuel pipe leak/burst and onto the hot engine and catch fire quite possible situation it is for future development |
| Bump Topic Topic ClosedOptions New Topic |
| Change to: | 0.0574sec
0.50
7 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 10th December 2025 - 01:44 PM |