Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
39 Pages < 1 2 3 4 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Military Thread V29

views
     
Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 06:23 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018


user posted image
Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 06:27 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018


For this years Pitch Black Exercise, Sg sent the following:

1) 1 CAEW AEW&C aircraft
2) 1 MRTT tanker aircraft
3) 8 F15SG
4) 8 F16Vs
Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 06:33 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
Sg trains with many established armed forces around the world. Recently, SAFs Hunter AFVs were seen in Germany:




Look at the vehicle serial number:

user posted image

This is a Hunter IFV from an earlier batch - see the serial number:

user posted image

Not too hard to see how many Hunter AFVs have been built by Singapore right?

Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 06:44 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(Mai189 @ Sep 3 2022, 06:27 PM)


For this years Pitch Black Exercise, Sg sent the following:

1) 1 CAEW AEW&C aircraft
2) 1 MRTT tanker aircraft
3) 8 F15SG
4) 8 F16Vs
*
user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

200 nautical miles = 370km

Open source reporting shows that the max radar range is about 450km for about 1000 tracked targets as small as a mortar round.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/r...ne-g550-2917111

Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 08:54 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(issac99289928 @ Sep 3 2022, 08:07 PM)
The coating on the F-35 has some issues. It peels off if you go supersonic for more than a few minutes.
*
Old news - fixed. In fact it is a known known. Aircraft panels and coatings need regular servicing.

https://www.419fw.afrc.af.mil/News/Article-...alth-for-f-35a/

https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a63ddc...ate_4_13_17.pdf

And pricier than normal aircrafts. But look at the countries buying them - all have big budgets.

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 3 2022, 09:08 PM
Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 08:59 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(issac99289928 @ Sep 3 2022, 08:18 PM)
The U.S. Air Force Just Admitted The F-35 Stealth Fighter Has Failed

America needs a new fighter to solve that F-35 problem, officials said.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/...ter-has-failed/
*
David Axe is a known f35 critic.

The litmus test is the fact that more and more tier 3 air forces all around the world r buying f35 backed by thier own defence science and material organisation assesments and not press correspondents.
Mai189
post Sep 3 2022, 09:36 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018

Mai189
post Sep 4 2022, 11:37 AM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(issac99289928 @ Sep 4 2022, 06:13 AM)
F-35 Fleet Is Grounded by US Air Force Over Ejection-Seat Worries

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/202...on-seat-worries
*
And Germany just ordered F35s + i cant rem more orders from other countries recently.

Being a true multi national project, news and development is transparent with multiple tests done by many countries in different weather or climate conditions. In fact, these news is testament to a quickly maturing 5th gen plane from hardware to software with the ability 2 operate anywhere in the world.

Other jet projects are not as transparent as the F35s. You will find out something is wrong with them in a hot war - did Russias much praised (by them) Suks and Migs achiebe air superiority over Ukraine? Hahaha. Who got cheated?

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 4 2022, 11:42 AM
Mai189
post Sep 4 2022, 11:41 AM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(issac99289928 @ Sep 4 2022, 05:00 AM)
tanks are obsolete and can be easily destroyed by drone bombs .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI5ABZPw9Us
*
Dump Msias 48 tanks then.

Every weapon needs to be used in a certain way. Tanks are employed with proper tactics and do not operate in silo fashion.

By tbe way, most modern western tanks have thicker armour and youd need a proper atgm to kill them.


Mai189
post Sep 4 2022, 11:59 AM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
Sg may have exercised purchase options on the leased 40 to 50 leo 2 tanks (for training) in Germany. Recent photos of Exercise Panzer Strike show these tanks upgraded to the Leo 2SG tank standard. Sg currently has about 206 Leo 2Sg tanks (as declared by the Govt of Germany in its UN arms transfer report). The addition of these new tanks will bring the total to about 250+ Leo 2sg tanks.

user posted image
user posted image

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 4 2022, 12:52 PM
Mai189
post Sep 4 2022, 12:19 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
user posted image

Tank with serial no. 204 in Sg

user posted image

Tank with serial no. 172 in Sg


Sg tanks are serialised 81 followed by the tank no. The serial numbers matches the number of tanks transferred by Germany to Sg thus far. So they have about 206 Leo2Sg tanks currently. But the additional purchase of the 40 to 50 leased tanks in Germany will bring that number to 250+ Leo2Sg tanks.

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 4 2022, 12:20 PM
Mai189
post Sep 5 2022, 08:52 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
user posted image

Just a sensing of the size of RSAF's future F35 fleet:

QUOTE
The Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) is considering to co-locate its current Lockheed Martin F-16C/D multirole combat aircraft detachment at Luke Air Force Base (AFB) in Phoenix, Arizona, with its future Lockheed F-35 stealth fighters at a long-term training centre, United States officials have revealed.

Arkansas senator Tom Cotton said in a 20 July statement that Fort Smith Airport in Indiana has been selected as one of five possible sites to host the RSAF’s F-16 and F-35 aircraft, noting that Secretary of the Air Force Barbara Barrett had earlier signed a 6 July memorandum to establish a permanent Foreign Military Sales (FMS) training centre at a single location for 24 to 36 F-35 aircraft and F-16 basing.

Besides Fort Smith Airport, other sites that have been shortlisted include Hulman Field, Buckley AFB in Colorado, Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland in Texas, and Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Michigan.

“Fort Smith is a strong candidate for Singapore’s F-16 squadron and future F-35 aircraft,” Senator Cotton said.

“The United States deeply values our relationship with Singapore, and I appreciate Secretary Barrett’s consideration of Arkansas as a location for our important defence partnership,” he added. “I look forward to working with the Air Force and the state of Arkansas to ensure that Fort Smith is a welcome location for this vital new national security mission.”

No timelines were given for the selection process.

Singapore’s F-35 acquisition details – more aircraft hinted?

It is worth noting that Senator Cotton’s statement revealed a potential Singaporean F-35 fleet size of between 24 and 36 F-35 at the future training centre, when the island state has thus far only indicated an interest in up to 12 aircraft.

On 9 January 2020, the US State Department approved a potential US$2.75 billion FMS sale of Lockheed Martin F-35B short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) stealth fighters as well as associated spare parts, logistics, and training support to Singapore.

The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) noted that the Singaporean government had requested an initial batch of four F-35B STOVL aircraft with the option to acquire an additional eight, with the proposed sale also provisioning for up to 13 Pratt & Whitney F135 engines including one initial spare, undisclosed electronic warfare, communications, and navigation systems, the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) maintenance and logistics planning suite, software development and integration, and training equipment.

The F-35B platform brings a brand new STOVL capability for the RSAF, which have never operated such types of aircraft since it was stood up in September 1968 as the Singapore Air Defence Command (SADC). Singapore would be the fourth Asia Pacific country – and the first in Southeast Asia – to operate the F-35 after Australia, Japan, and South Korea.

Current US-based RSAF training activities
The RSAF presently maintains four training detachments in the continental United States, with Boeing AH-64D Apache attack helicopters from the Peace Vanguard detachment at Silverbell Army Heliport in Marana, Arizona, and Boeing F-15SG multirole combat aircraft at Peace Carvin V at Mountain Home Air Base in Idaho. The service previously maintained Boeing CH-47D heavy-lift helicopters at the Peace Prairie detachment at Grand Prairie Army Aviation Support Facility in Texas, before relocating the helicopters to the Australian Army Aviation Training Centre at Oakey, Queensland in mid-2018.

Singapore also signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the United States on 7 December 2019 to establish a new combat aircraft training detachment at Andersen AFB on the US island territory of Guam in the western Pacific Ocean.

The MOU lays out the framework for the RSAFs future detachment in Guam, covering the deployment of the services F-15SG and F-16 fighter aircraft and other assets such as the Gulfstream 550 airborne early warning aircraft for training.

The US Department of Defense (DoD) said the detachment will be stood up around 2029 and will initially comprise a squadron of aircraft and support personnel, as well as associated infrastructure such as hangars, aprons, and ancillary facilities.


https://www.asianmilitaryreview.com/2020/07...-united-states/

If RSAF stations 36 F35s As or Bs at Continental United States (CONUS), that would mean a presence of at least 72 to 80+ F35s based in SG itself. Of course, the CONUS based aircrafts are expected to fly back to SG at the start of hostilities.

Sg typically buys military equipment in batches as opposed to one large order.


Mai189
post Sep 5 2022, 10:37 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(marfccy @ Sep 5 2022, 10:23 PM)
unpopular opinion: modern ATGM mostly outclassed modern tanks, be it western or asian etc

like you said, its all down to how its used. knowing the ins and outs of ATGM warfare is extremely important for tankers to avoid being under crosshairs
*
Actually, the "West" are increasing their tank holdings. Not reducing.

Yes. Tactics matter a lot. But you will draw a different conclusion of tanks versus atgms when you compare western tanks to eastern ones.

Rule of thumb: Avoid anything Russian pls.

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 5 2022, 10:38 PM
Mai189
post Sep 5 2022, 10:45 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(marfccy @ Sep 5 2022, 10:42 PM)
this sounds superficial at best

even modern western tanks with shoddy tactics are shown to be blasted to bits (see Turkey Leopards, Saudi Arabia M1A2s)
inb4 export model weaker excuse
*
No it is not. Russia has lost 2000 tanks since the war began a couple of months ago.

This attrition rate has not been suffered by any army within the same span of time since perhaps ww2.

I am saying that tactics matter. But the maker of the tank matters too.

Mai189
post Sep 5 2022, 10:56 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(marfccy @ Sep 5 2022, 10:52 PM)
sure they did but remember who are arming the opposition. it is only logical they will take out Russian obsolete tanks with much modern ATGM systems

try arming Iraq in 2000 with modern ATGMs and see how the US tanks will fare during Gulf War. they sure as hell will take on more tank casualties
*
The iraqis also had atgms e.g. kornets. The allies never suffered the losses Russia did.

And what obsolete Russian tanks? Russis T90s, 80s, 72s, etc. Modern tanks by Russian definition.

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 5 2022, 10:56 PM
Mai189
post Sep 5 2022, 11:22 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(marfccy @ Sep 5 2022, 11:03 PM)
yes and the coalition force never set their tanks right into kornet's crosshairs based on the tactics they employed right? they are much smarter than that to do something as foolish to pit ATGM vs tanks directly

the rule has always been simple, ATGM > MBTs. only tactics in how they utilise MBT kept them alive against ATGMs. not the tanks "superior armor". tanks can at most shrug off 1st hit and keep crew alive but the tank is already crippled and useless

this aint WW2 era anymore, ATGMs outpaced tanks armor long ago. APS is the next level thing that is keeping MBTs even more relevant into today
*
Coalition tanks were just as susceptible to atgms when their escorts e.g. infantry were depleted.

Rubbish! It is not as simple as x versus y. The type of atgm, location of atgm strike, angle of attack, types of armour e.g. latest ceramic, chobham, depleted uranium, etc. all matter. And what makes you think a first strike can cripple a tank all the time? Presumptous!

My point is that western tanks are better built. Add to to tactics and youve got a formidable thrusting force.
Mai189
post Sep 6 2022, 11:35 AM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(marfccy @ Sep 6 2022, 12:33 AM)
despite all these variables, the first hit itself mostly already damage the optics, sensors and whatnot on the tank's external and partially the internals. the crew and innards mostly intact but without external optics, sensors etc theyre as good as blindfolded. i was watching a simulation on tank shells onto even modern tanks, a simple basic AP round itself while have no chance of penetrating western tanks armor from front, the kinetic impact is strong enough to render crew concussed and damage to systems, crippling the tank.

imagine a situation like this. you and your tank crew are moving from post A to post B, suddenly a tank round/ATGM hits you. everything went dark, sensors kaput, optics cant see externally anymore and suddenly tank halts because the driver is incapacitated or tracks broken. what do you do? exit tank to be ambushed or stay inside and await the inevitable 2nd round that could potentially rip the internals? you get the gist

no doubt abt this, but my point is ATGM are outpacing the western tanks even more. ATGMs are designed to destroy tanks, obviously they have the advantage considering the tanks are much more limited by weight and sizing. no point building an indestructible tank to only be crippled by it being too heavy or immobile for use
*
Your posts are getting more inane. What makes you so sure the first hit will damage the optics or sensors or even the battle manage system on board. In fact, tanks have been known to take hits and dish out just fine. This is not a computet game. Injury to tanks or combat kills or outright destruction are totally different things.

I would agree that atgms are dangerous to tanks. But i will not agree that atgms are outpaced by tanks period. Futhermore, tank armour is being improved upon to deal with the latest missiles and tanks now even come with active protection systems. Add that to tactics.

Countries are buying more tanks. The euros, Us, china, russia, etc. all have ongoing tank projects. The poles threw away their pt71s, gave their leo2s back to germany (as the germans want to reconstitute their tank force) and buying several hundred korean tanks

Mai189
post Sep 6 2022, 12:36 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(marfccy @ Sep 6 2022, 11:54 AM)
wait, youre telling me a heavy dense kinetic projectile travelling at supersonic speeds will not damage the external sensors and optics of the tanks when impacted?  doh.gif

youre severely underestimating how strong ATGMs are. like i said, they might not penetrate from 1st hit due to systems like APS, or how they negate the warheads but the impact alone is extremely strong and will damage the externals and internals of the tanks. already a huge compromise in the tank's capability if it gets hit. how sure are you the systems are running fine?
this is correct, this is why APS are extremely valuable + other protection systems to combine to maintain highest level of survivability.

youre still missing the point at the end, my point is tanks are now used differently compared to WW2 era due how dangerous ATGMs are. not the complete obsoletion of tanks! geez, countries wont stop using tanks because AT exists.
*
That is presumptous. Tanks are built to take hits. Ive explained before that many variables are involved. An atgm attack against a tank will not necessarily destroy its optics, sensors etc.

My point on better armour and APS is to support the contention that atgms have not outpaced tanks as tank defences have improved as well.

Ive never said that atgms are not dangerous.

What has usage of tanks in ww2 got 2 do with this? Ive said that tanks need to be used with proper tactics from the onset. Tactics change depending on the adversity faced.

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 6 2022, 12:38 PM
Mai189
post Sep 6 2022, 05:51 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
Performance of Merkava tanks:

https://defense-update.com/20070614_lebanon...ts%20penetrated

QUOTE
The IDF employed several hundred tanks in combat. According to official reports, about ten percent were hit by various threats. Less than half of the hits penetrated


QUOTE
A colonel commanding an armored brigade, which bore the brunt of battle, mentioned in an interview that during the war that hundreds of antitank missiles were fired on his unit and in total only 18 tanks were seriously damaged. Of those, missiles actually penetrated only five or six vehicles and according to statistics, only two tanks were totally destroyed, however, both by super-heavy IED charges.


Performance of Challenger 2 tanks:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/...eeds-some-21634

QUOTE
One Challenger 2 was allegedly struck by seventy RPGs—and emerged with its crew unscratched. Another survived seventeen RPGs and a Milan missile, and despite the battle damage, was back in combat the next day.

Western tanks are not indestructible.But they sure as hell not easy to knock out.

This post has been edited by Mai189: Sep 6 2022, 05:56 PM
Mai189
post Sep 6 2022, 05:57 PM

New Member
*
Newbie
0 posts

Joined: Aug 2018
QUOTE(issac99289928 @ Sep 6 2022, 05:29 PM)
tanks are easily found by drones  which can fly at high altitude.
*
We have air superiority is it?

39 Pages < 1 2 3 4 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0879sec    0.39    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 3rd December 2025 - 12:34 AM