QUOTE(KLboy92 @ Nov 25 2016, 08:14 PM)
BTW we talked about rocket backblast the other day... this one is jet engine, not quite rocket but well 
LMAO so hard watching the doll bergetar2
WTF!!!! LMAO so hard watching the doll bergetar2
Military Thread V23
|
|
Nov 25 2016, 07:14 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
397 posts Joined: Jan 2016 From: Hong Kong |
|
|
|
Nov 25 2016, 07:49 PM
Show posts by this member only | IPv6 | Post
#222
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,167 posts Joined: Feb 2012 |
|
|
|
Nov 25 2016, 08:16 PM
|
![]()
Newbie
4 posts Joined: Jan 2012 |
Indonesian Army new Fennec Light Attack Helicopters already equipped with gun & rocket pods, Indonesian Air Force EC725 Cougar CSAR helicopters and Indonesian National SAR Agency AS365 N3+ Dauphin helicopter ready for delivery at PT Dirgantara hangar. Credit to Haryadi Dwi.
![]() This post has been edited by azriel: Nov 25 2016, 08:18 PM |
|
|
Nov 25 2016, 08:55 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
397 posts Joined: Jan 2016 From: Hong Kong |
|
|
|
Nov 25 2016, 11:41 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
479 posts Joined: May 2010 |
QUOTE(NGT1137 @ Nov 25 2016, 08:09 PM) Yes they do but they have bigger problems to deal with. Turkey's main concern seems to be Kurdish regions being united in northern Syria. By intervening with their own supported rebels against ISIS, they hope to prevent that wedding in between two cantons.And the day those Turkish positions was bombed was also the anniversary of the Russian jet downed by Turkish Air Force. Coincidence or some kind of reminder that Russia has not forgotten. |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 07:31 AM
|
![]()
Newbie
4 posts Joined: Jan 2012 |
Leopard 2 Evolution AMAP test.
![]() QUOTE Side armor module of the Leopard 2 Evolution defeating a PG-7VLT with tandem warhead In case of the Leopard 2 Evolution, the side armor of the tank was capable of resisting the PG-7VLT ammunition with tandem warhead, which can penetrate more than 500 mm of steel armor after defeating explosive reactive armor (ERA). In static tests, a similar thick array of AMAP was also capable of protecting against the PG-7VR round (fitted with the same warhead as used by the RPG-29 ammunition), which is capable of penetrating up to 750 mm steel armor (600 mm after ERA). http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.co.i...lected.html?m=1 |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 08:23 AM
|
![]()
Newbie
0 posts Joined: Dec 2014 |
India Unable to Integrate Missiles, Looks to Israel for Combat Drones ![]() NEW DELHI (Sputnik) — The Indian government has signed a $400 million final contract with Israel Aerospace Industries during Israeli President Reuven Rivlin's last week's India visit for armed drones. The contract was signed after the Indian armed forces indicated their impatience with the inability of defense scientists to come up with a definitive timeframe for developing an armed drone. New Delhi signed the contract almost after a year of its approval to purchase 10 Heron TP drones. Delivery of the drones is expected to begin from the year 2019. Earlier, Indian armed forces had hoped defense scientists would make progress in developing a combat drone. But India's Defense Research and Development Organization recently announced that the indigenous medium endurance "Rustom 2'' drone will not be converted into a combat drone. DRDO was unable to integration missiles onto the Rustom series of drones. "India has a long way still to go. China is the leading civil drone manufacturer in the world. USA and Israel are leaders in state-of-the-art military UAVs. India should seek support from Israel for Make-in-India UAVs," says Air Marshal Anil Chopra (retired). Sources told Sputnik that Israel has also offered to jointly develop an advanced version of Heron TP. Indian armed forces began inducting drones in 2000. Currently, more than 200 drones, primarily Heron from Israel and local produce Nishant, are serving the Indian armed forces. Sputniknews |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 08:29 AM
|
![]()
Newbie
0 posts Joined: Dec 2014 |
Syrian Rebels Are Firing an Antique Mystery Cannon The gun looks like something from the 19th century. ![]() Video has emerged from the Syrian Civil War of a gun that appears to date to the 19th century, or is based on technology from the time. The YouTube video claims the gun is being used to shell Syrian government forces loyal to President Bashar al-lAssad. The weapon appears to be a breech-loaded cannon, operated by pulling a lanyard that sets off the primer, which in turn ignites the gunpowder charge. This hurls the projectile out of the barrel and downrange toward the target. The gun appears appears to have been built in the 1800s and was probably taken from a museum. The alternative explanation is that Syrian rebels have been experimenting at metallurgy and casting their own barrels, though that doesn't seem particularly likely. Like many 19th century guns, the barrel thickens near the breach, where the gunpowder goes off. It is also thicker at the muzzle, where the gunpowder blast is directed. The gun appears to fire some sort of irregularly-shaped improvised projectile. Makes sense: It's unlikely any shells originally made for the gun were just lying around, and even if they were, they'd be dangerous by now. It's also quite possible that the video of the shells impacting the building have nothing to do with the old gun—notice that the gun is firing at a relatively flat trajectory, while the "shells" are coming down almost vertically. One interesting aspect of the gun is the hydraulic elevation system that raises and lowers it. That's definitely of modern construction, because the hydraulic struts are clearly made of stainless steel. Perhaps the truck it's mounted on was a former garbage truck. What's really impressive about this is that—assuming the cannon really is in action—it didn't blow up while the guerrillas were developing shells for it. Modern gunpowder is much more potent than old-time stuff—even rifles built for World War I are dangerous if you use them to fire high-powered modern ammunition. Popular mechanics |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 08:40 AM
|
![]()
Newbie
0 posts Joined: Dec 2014 |
Did the Navy Steal Its New Warship Designs? It’s the cornerstone of the U.S. Navy’s future fleet. And a legendary ship-designer says the idea was all his. ![]() QUOTE And in recent months, four of the 400-foot-long warships—half of the Littoral Combat Ships currently in commission—have suffered serious engine breakdowns, possible signs of systemic problems with the ship’s design and operating procedures. QUOTE The 80-year-old, British-born Giles filed suit, via the company he founded, Fastship, in 2012. But the legal challenge has gone largely unnoticed in the mainstream press. He alleged in his complaint that the Navy violated two Fastship patents granted in 1992 and 1993 and which, taken together, describe a novel design for a faster, more efficient ship, one that essentially glides across the water—“semi-planing” is the technical term—rather than plowing through it. QUOTE The trick, according to one of Fastship’s patents, is to build a hull with a flattened rear underside and, while the ship is underway, shoot high-pressure water across the flat section. The combination of flat hull and water-jets creates “a dual component of lift,” the patent explains. And as the hull partially lifts out of the water, it moves faster than can a ship with a traditional V-shape hull that digs more deeply into the sea. QUOTE Lockheed apparently wanted to make use of Fastship’s speedy-vessel concept. In 2002, the two companies formed what Giles described as a “strategic partnership.” Fastship handed over its design specs and test data, Giles told The Daily Beast, adding that Fastship had previously supplied the Navy with similar information in confidence between 1998 and 2000. QUOTE Lockheed dropped Giles’s company from its Littoral Combat Ship design team in 2004, after it had proposed to the Navy—and the Navy had agreed to buy—a vessel design that Giles said matched Prelude’s patented parameters but was too long and skinny for maximum efficiency. Since cutting the first contracts for Littoral Combat Ships in 2004, the Navy has spent billions of dollars on the Lockheed version of the class. USS Detroit, the fourth and latest Lockheed ship, commissioned on Oct. 22. QUOTE The lawsuit has dragged on for four years and could last months longer. In October, the Justice Department’s lawyer rolled out as an expert witness Donald Blount, an authority on high-speed vessels who claimed that any knowledgeable ship-designer could come up with Giles’s semi-planing system—and therefore Fastship’s patents were invalid. QUOTE To counter the government’s experts, Fastship’s lawyer deployed a secret weapon—Garwin, an 88-year-old physicist who, among other historic accomplishments, helped to design nuclear bombs and America’s first spy satellite. The Daily Beast This post has been edited by BorneoAlliance: Nov 26 2016, 08:44 AM |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 01:04 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
189 posts Joined: Aug 2015 From: Cherasboy |
QUOTE(azriel @ Nov 26 2016, 07:31 AM) Sigh. |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 01:39 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
397 posts Joined: Jan 2016 From: Hong Kong |
wwooots, receive some gossip... what do u think of singkie making their own tanks?
|
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 01:50 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,210 posts Joined: Aug 2011 |
|
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 06:19 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
41 posts Joined: Sep 2013 |
|
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 06:25 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
27 posts Joined: Feb 2014 From: Somewhere in the pacific, or indian ocean |
|
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 07:21 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
397 posts Joined: Jan 2016 From: Hong Kong |
QUOTE(thpace @ Nov 26 2016, 03:50 PM) doubt so... but defense companies sure make lots of $$$ nowQUOTE(Frozen_Sun @ Nov 26 2016, 08:19 PM) bionix was so long ago... lolfrom bronco to terrex to lsv2 to peacekeeper prc and yesterday belrex pcsv... hmmm news report that merkavas bring brought in might have to do with it... but i got news more towards licensing of certain parts QUOTE(DDG_Ross @ Nov 26 2016, 08:25 PM) |
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 07:35 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
172 posts Joined: Sep 2009 From: penang wit love |
|
|
|
Nov 26 2016, 08:27 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
41 posts Joined: Sep 2013 |
QUOTE(Fat & Fluffy @ Nov 26 2016, 07:21 PM) doubt so... but defense companies sure make lots of $$$ now yeah...I know. I thought they would start the MBT development in early 2000s, because they still had old light tanks. But after the purchase of Leopard 2SG.... I think that it'll be at least delayed.....bionix was so long ago... lol from bronco to terrex to lsv2 to peacekeeper prc and yesterday belrex pcsv... hmmm news report that merkavas bring brought in might have to do with it... but i got news more towards licensing of certain parts |
|
|
Nov 27 2016, 12:50 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
397 posts Joined: Jan 2016 From: Hong Kong |
Teachable moments from SAF Terrex ICVs seized in Hong Kong
![]() ![]() Without a shot fired, the Singapore Army lost possession of nine Terrex infantry combat vehicles (ICVs) after Hong Kong customs impounded the armoured vehicles as they were transiting through the port. This episode has many teachable moments for followers of statecraft and must be played out carefully as the concluding act has yet to take centre stage. Any diplomatic gaffes, missteps by any party could result in misgivings that linger long after the fate of the SAF war machines has been decided upon. This would have unfortunate consequences for the parties concerned if what could be ascribed to routine/rigorous customs checks is given another spin. News of this episode - the largest ever seizure of Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) war machines - emerged on Thursday (24 Nov), courtesy of Hong Kong news portal, FactWire. It had reported that up to 12 Terrex ICVs were seized in the container terminal as they were en route from the Taiwanese port of Kaohsiung to Singapore. Within days, the topic of SAF training in Taiwan has come under the spotlight with many theories postulated. ![]() At one end of the spectrum, some theorised an administrative gaffe as the culprit. More complex interpretations blamed strategic topics du jour such as the South China Sea dispute, the city-state's leanings toward the United States and military training in Taiwan as possible irritants to China-Singapore ties that could have prompted Hong Kong customs officials to impound the Terrex ICVs. Seen at face value, it may appear that Beijing wants to telegraph its intentions to Singapore by using the Terrex ICVs as a proxy. This theory is not far-fetched, but unlikely. If so, it would indicate that Chinese statecraft has taken on a somewhat dramatic posture when there are other means in the diplomatic toolbox to ensure its messages are transmitted loud and clear. Whatever the cause, this is not the first time that policy makers in Beijing, Taipei and Singapore have had to confront the matter of SAF activities overseas. Five training incidents that claimed the lives of at least 10 Singaporeans put to test the relationship between China and Singapore, when the Taiwanese venue of SAF war games made the news. The following incidents were reported by Singapore media and are open source: In August 1993, two soldiers from 2 SIR who were riding a motorbike skidded and landed in a drain during a night ride. Both were evacuated to Singapore by a Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) C-130 aeromedical flight. One of the soldiers died later from severe head injuries. In April 1994, all four persons on board a RSAF 125 Squadron Super Puma on a predawn flight died after the helicopter crashed into a mountain in Taiwan. The crash was so severe that dental records had to be used as a means of identification. Complicating the Singapore Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) news release was the presence of a Taiwanese military officer aboard the helicopter. In June 1995, two full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) from 3 Signals died after their vehicle went off a hill in Taiwan. In May 2007, two full-time National Servicemen were killed when a twin-seat Republic of China Air Force F-5F jet fighter crashed into storeroom located within a Taiwanese military base. Two other NSFs warded at the Taipei Tri-Service Hospital were repatriated aboard a RSAF KC-135R configured as a flying hospital. One of the NSFs died 17 days later at Singapore General Hospital. In June 2009, an SAF regular was found motionless in his bunk at a Taiwanese military facility. He was pronounced dead in hospital in Taiwan. The ammo tech was in Taiwan to support the SAF's unilateral training there. ![]() Throughout these dark moments, Beijing maintained a dignified silence. It did so in the era when New Media had yet to be invented. And it maintained this stance this century when New Media outlets amplified the news - up until the Terrex episode. What's more, the pinnacle command positions in Singapore's fledgling air force and navy were occupied by Taiwanese military personnel seconded to Singapore. Beijing could have responded robustly decades ago - but did not do so. Inaction could not have been out of ignorance as these command appointments were widely known in diplomatic circles. The appointments have also been chronicled in SAF coffee table books. So China's reticence was done by choice. Why? In all the years of SAF activities overseas, Beijing's acquiescence has been reciprocated by the Lion City's delicate handling of the matter out of respect to the Middle Kingdom. This approach extends to the HK Terrex episode, where all MINDEF/SAF statements on the matter have left out the very pertinent point of the origin of the shipment. This approach may explain why journalists hounding the ministry for clarity have found themselves facing a wall of silence whenever "Taiwan" appears in their questions. Thanks to behind-the-scenes statecraft from all sides, a semblance of implicit understanding has been achieved for years. As a result of this balance, SAF activities in Taiwan became an open secret that is watched closely, yet tolerated so long as no one decided to exploit the matter. This has been to the benefit of all as foreign relations were allowed to flourish on a win-win trajectory without being bogged down or stymied by the awkward matter of SAF war games overseas. Diplomacy aside, one important dividend that Beijing has cashed in from this matter comes from inculcating its position to tens of thousands of Singaporeans who have trained in Taiwan. This comes about from stern security briefings to those bound for Taiwan not to talk about SAF training there. For the average Singaporean, who is usually apathetic about regional affairs, a trip to Taiwan downloads the essence of Beijing's strategic narrative: That there is only one China. That Taiwan is viewed as part of the motherland. And that foreign nationals are not to dabble in Chinese affairs. The dividend China has reaped from such awareness is impossible to quantify. Yet, Chinese officials would probably quietly acknowledge it has been invaluable as Beijing reaps the spinoffs for doing virtually nothing. And as the NSFs grow into adulthood and later in life move into Singapore's high society, Singaporeans are ingrained with the dynamics of China-Taiwan relations long after the war games are over. ![]() Now insert the matter of a customs inspection, during which officials simply had to act as they knew FactWire was watching. Add the multitude of rules and regulations that regulate imports/exports, which have to be followed for compliance reasons. Factor in the media glare - more pervasive now with 24/365 New Media channels - and we begin to understand why officials in Beijing have issued the sound bites that we have heard in recent days. Chinese Foreign Ministry Mr Geng Shuang, said:“All ships that enter Hong Kong should follow the laws of the Special Administrative Region. We oppose countries that have diplomatic relations with us to have any form of official exchanges with Taiwan, including defence cooperation.” Yes, this sounds harsh and is in all likelihood directed at Singapore. But what more do you expect China to say when asked pointblank for a response to an issue which three parties danced around delicately for decades? The sound bites reflect the realpolitik that comes about now that the open secret that officials assiduously avoided mentioning has become a talking point. For Beijing not to make motherhood sound bites would signal a pivot from its long-standing position on what it regards as a renegade province - and that is something Beijing will not do. The question now is how the impasse will be concluded. This brings us back to the teachable moments. It could conclude with a takeway that shows that SG-Sino relations are far stronger than what the western media makes it out to be and that Beijing isn't throwing a hissy fit with the Terrex ICVs as a convenient proxy. It could be resolved quietly, without fanfare with behind-the-scenes diplomacy. If the worst-case scenario pans out with the Terrex ICVs ending up in a Chinese military museum, then this could give moves by regional parties (read: Australia) to have Singapore pivot south more momentum in a faster and bigger way. How this story ends really isn't for Singapore to suggest as its a matter of red tape, or should we say, Red tape. ![]() http://kementah.blogspot.sg/ |
|
|
Nov 27 2016, 01:18 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
189 posts Joined: Aug 2015 From: Cherasboy |
Much like the Scorpene leak, I think this may well torpedo the Terrex 3 entry for USMC's AAV replacement.
|
|
|
Nov 27 2016, 04:26 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
406 posts Joined: Jun 2007 From: 3°50'**.**"N - 103°16'**.**"E |
|
| Bump Topic Topic ClosedOptions New Topic |
| Change to: | 0.0329sec
0.09
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 7th December 2025 - 08:24 AM |